Patna High Court
Deepak KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the outcome of that verification.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 6.480 litres of liquor from a public market. He argued that he was not caught in possession, the alleged liquor was recovered from a place not belonging to him, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of a co-accused made in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the accused was not caught in possession.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a co-accused in police custody can form the sole basis for arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable Sale and Settlement (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- confessional statement
- possession
- Section 482(2)
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44116 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-357 Year-2026 Thana- GARDANIBAG District- Patna
======================================================
Deepak Kumar S/o Naresh Singh R/o Brahmpur, P.S.- Mokamah, at present
R/o Chitkohra Basti, P.S.- Gardanibag, Dist.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sucheta Yadav, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State, Ms. Sucheta Yadav.
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
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 6.480 liters of liquor from Chitkohra
market.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and is accessible to public at large and came to be implicated
based on confessional statement of Vijay in police custody
which does not have any evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44116 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/2
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.
5000/- (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
Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 357 of 2026 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 only, in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.