Patna High Court
Dhiraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bond conditions and verification of his criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhiraj Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of liquor, a car and a motorcycle from another individual's house. The petitioner argued that he was not present at the scene, had no possession of the seized items, and was implicated solely on the basis of a confessional statement made by the co-accused while in police custody, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents, including two earlier cases under the Excise Act. The Court considered the submissions and directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. The order further stipulated that if more than four prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC to a person accused of offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a co-accused in police custody can be relied upon to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
- confessional statement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44275 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2026 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
======================================================
Dhiraj Kumar Son of Gulo Yadav Resident of Village- Khutiya, P.S.- Mansi,
District- Khagaria, (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Seema Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr/s.Sucheta Yadav
======================================================
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) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of four cases out of which two
cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
99.75 litres of liquor from house of Deepak Kumar along with a
car and a motorcycle was also seized.
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 of
any of the seized vehicle and even alleged recovery is from a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44275 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/3
place, which does not belong to the petitioner and he has no
concern or relation with Deepak, but then he came to be
implicated based on confessional statement of Deepak in police
custody which 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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 Chautham P. S. Case No.138 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44275 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/3
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 four cases,
then it 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 four 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.