Patna High Court
Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Kumar Mukhiya @ Suraj MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Suraj Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, where 324 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from three motorcycles. He argued that he was not present at the spot, had no possession of the liquor or vehicles, and was implicated solely on confessional statements of co‑accused Shivam and Ravi, which he claimed lack evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than four prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if exactly four, the bail will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether confessional statements of co‑accused constitute sufficient basis for arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities (or related) Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedents
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44863 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-272 Year-2025 Thana- PARIHAR District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Kumar Mukhiya @ Suraj Mukhiya Son of Pchchu
Mukhiya Resident of village - Bathnaha, P.S.- Bathnaha, District - Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Meena Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-07-2026 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) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 324 litres of liquor from three
motorcycles. 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 any of the seized
vehicle and he came to be implicated based on confessional
statement of Shivam and Ravi in police custody which does not
have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that once an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44863 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
2/3
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police
starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local
person, confessional statement or secret information without
holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
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.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 Parihar P.S. Case No.272/2025, 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 more than
four cases, 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 has antecedent of four
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44863 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
3/3
cases, 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.