Patna High Court
Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Vikash Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case alleging offences under Sections 30(a), 32(2) and 41(1) of the Excise Act involving the alleged recovery of 1,800 litres of liquor from a truck. The petitioner, who has eleven prior criminal cases (six under the Excise Act), argued that he was not arrested at the spot, had no possession of the liquor, and was implicated only through a confessional statement of a co‑accused, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.55,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If the antecedent exceeds eleven cases, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, the provisional bail will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the seriousness of the offences under the Excise Act and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused can be a basis to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession and non‑arrest at the scene affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(2), 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- confessional statement
- Section 438
- bail bond
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43600 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-226 Year-2026 Thana- PATEPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Vikash Kumar S/O Rambabu Ray R/O Village- Madhopur, P.S- Mahua, Dist.-
Vaishali. (wrongly mentioned as patepur in FIR and Imp. order)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anish Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Khurshid Anwar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a), 32(2) and 41(1) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of eleven cases out of which six
cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
1800 litres of liquor from a truck.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner or
driver of the seized truck and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Pawan Kumar in police custody which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43600 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/3
does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that
police in majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at
the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and
confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding
a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.55,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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 Patepur P. S. Case No.226 of 2026, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than eleven, then it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43600 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner has antecedent of eleven cases only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.