Patna High Court
Chhotu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail may be granted notwithstanding the alleged recovery, provided the petitioner furnishes bail bonds and the trial court verifies that his criminal antecedent does not exceed five cases.
Summary
The petitioner, Chhotu Kumar, owner of Anshraj Hotel, faced arrest in a case alleging recovery of 3.870 litres of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and that any liquor found could have been brought by customers without his knowledge. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail, noting his prior five cases under the Excise Act. The Court considered the submissions and, under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., granted provisional anticipatory bail on condition of a Rs 25,000 bail bond with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. The order further stipulated that if the trial court finds more than five prior cases, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise it would be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. despite the alleged liquor recovery.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of five cases affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42788 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-269 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE UDAKISHUNGANJ District-
Madhepura
======================================================
Chhotu Kumar S/O Late Kishor Prasad Sah R/O Village-Chandika Asthan
Bihariganj, Ward No. 10, PS- Bihariganj, Distt-Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 3.870 litres of liquor from Anshraj
Hotel.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession.
5. It is further submitted that petitioner came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the hotel from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42788 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
2/3
where the recovery was made. It is next submitted that
customers in large number come to the hotel and it might be a
possibility that some customers had come with meager amount
of liquor without the knowledge of the petitioner but then
petitioner in a mechanical manner came to be implicated as he
was implicated earlier also in similar manner in cases relating to
excise.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty-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
Udakishunganj Excise P.S. Case No. 269 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42788 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
3/3
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five
cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only five cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.