Patna High Court
Rakesh Chhitree @ Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Chhitree, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 10.23 litres of liquor recovered from a motorcycle. He argued he had no prior criminal record, was not the owner of the vehicle, and the case was based solely on confessional statements of co‑accused taken in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The court, after considering the clean antecedent claim and the weak evidential basis, granted provisional anticipatory bail on a modest bond and sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal record under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed immediately. The order directs the trial court to verify antecedents and act accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act based on the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and clean antecedent.
- Whether confessional statements of co‑accused taken in police custody can form the basis for arrest without additional evidence.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(2), 32(3), 36, 41(1), 41(2)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- confessional statements
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44429 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2025 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Rakesh Chhitree @ Rakesh Kumar S/O Bhikhari Ram Resident of Village-
Kawalpura, Kamalpura, Police Station- Paru, Distt.- Muzaffrpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a), 32(2),
32(3), 36, 41(1), 41(2) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10.23 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next
submitted 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 vehicle and he came to be implicated
based on confessional statement of Prem and Tinku in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44429 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/2
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds 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 Saraiya P.S. Case No.52/2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall 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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.