Patna High Court
Subodh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Subodh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning alleged recovery of 86 litres of liquor from a house not owned by him. He argued that the recovery was from Golu's house, he had no relation to Golu, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of Vishal made in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents within six weeks. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will be presumed concealed and the provisional order will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of Vishal recorded in police custody can form the basis for arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- Section 30(a) Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482(2) BNSS
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42227 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-268 Year-2025 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia
======================================================
Subodh Kumar S/o Makhan Das @ Makkhan Das R/o Village - (Belouri),
Gudri Tala Belouri, P.S - Sadar Thana, District - Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sumit Kumar Bhagat
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Asha Devi
======================================================
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 Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 86 litres of liquor from the house of Golu.
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 even the alleged
recovery is from a house which does not belong to the petitioner and
petitioner has no concern or relation with Golu and he came to be
implicated based on confessional statement of Vishal in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42227 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
2/2
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. 5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Sadar P.S. Case No. 268 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 one case then
it would be presumed that petitioner, for 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
one case 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.