Patna High Court
Chhotu Kumar @ Ankit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Chhotu Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 195.120 litres of liquor from an auto. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor or ownership of the vehicle. The prosecution opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted detention. The Court noted the lack of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the seized liquor and considered his clean record. It directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent by the trial court. The order further stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the provisional bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and clean antecedent justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44299 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-456 Year-2022 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Chhotu Kumar @ Ankit Kumar S/O Amar Singh Resident of Village- Naya
Tola, ward No .3, Police Station- Pakra, Distt.- Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Manoj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali
======================================================
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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 195.120 litres of liquor from an auto.
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
the seized auto and he came to be implicated at the instance of
local person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the
name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44299 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/3
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner has
not been implicated based on secret information
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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
Gopalpur (Rangra) P. S. Case No.456 of 2022, 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 even one case, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44299 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/3
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, 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.