Patna High Court
RAJ KUMAR RAM @ RANJAN RAMversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Raj Kumar Ram, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 31.8 litres of liquor recovered from a blue box concealed near a public hand pump. The petitioner argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the recovery site did not belong to him, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by an accused in police custody, which lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail application. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than one antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the alleged offence is based on a confessional statement and no possession is established.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor possession
- confessional statement
- Section 30
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44211 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Supaul
======================================================
RAJ KUMAR RAM @ RANJAN RAM Son of Maheshwari Ram Resident of
village - Fulkaha Chauhata, Ward No. 11, P.S.- Kishanpur, District - Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nafisu Zzoha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
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.
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 31.8 litres of liquor from a blue
coloured box concealed under the soil near a hand pump.
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 place which does not belong to the petitioner
and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44211 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/3
based on confessional statement of apprehended-accused in
police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
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 Excise
Supaul P.S. Case No. 121 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44211 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/3
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.