Patna High Court
Amar Raj @ Jai Kishun @ Kishan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Amar Raj, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 30(a), 32(i) and 41(i) of the Bihar Excise Act, alleging recovery of 4,406.6 litres of liquor from a truck. He contended that he was not arrested on the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, he was not the vehicle owner, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of an accused in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The court stipulated that if the petitioner is found to have more than three prior cases, the bail would not be confirmed; if exactly three, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving alleged excise offences and prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether a confessional statement of an accused in police custody can form the basis for implicating another person.
- Whether the police investigation was sufficient to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(i), 41(i)
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275, 3(5)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offences
- confessional statement
- police investigation
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Excise Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41672 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1091 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Amar Raj @ Jai Kishun @ Kishan Kumar S/O Pramod Singh @ Sunil Kumar
Resident of Madhopur Nijma/ Nijhma, Chitwara Kapoor/ Chitvara/Chhatwara
alias Chitwara, Police station-Mahua, District -Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Hemant Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275
and 3(5) of BNS and Sections 30(a), 32(i) and 41(i) of the Bihar
Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 4406.6 litres of liquor from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41672 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
2/3
confessional statement of apprehended-accused in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is further
submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the
instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or
secret information without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Mahua P.S. Case No. 1091 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
than three cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41672 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
3/3
the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of three
cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.