Patna High Court
DILIP RAI @ DILIP KUMARversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, pending verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Dilip Rai and Pappu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 276 litres of liquor from a field not belonging to them. They argued that they were not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in their possession, and the FIR omitted the informant's name, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties, and directed verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents. It stipulated that if the antecedent records do not match, the bail would not be confirmed for those petitioners; otherwise, the bail would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
- Whether the absence of possession of the alleged liquor and the omission of the informant's name in the FIR justify granting bail.
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents affect the confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- criminal antecedent
- liquor seizure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45424 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2026 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. DILIP RAI @ DILIP KUMAR S/o Umashankar Rai @ Umashankar Yadav
Resident of village- Naraha, Ps- Rajepur, District- East Champaran
2. Pappu Kumar S/o Pramod Ray @ Pramod Rai Resident of village- Naraha,
Ps- Rajepur, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sugandh Saurabh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case and petitioner no.2 is
a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of
276 litres of liquor from a field at Panapur Sareh. It is next
submitted that petitioners were not arrested from the spot as
such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and
even alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45424 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/3
the petitioner and is accessible to villagers at large and they
came to be implicated at the instance of local person but then
the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner
is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case
of the prosecution, when petitioners have not been implicated
based on secret information.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) each
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 Rajepur P.S. Case No.102/2026, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners
and in the event if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent
of more than one case and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of even
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45424 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
3/3
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioners
had concealed their antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with
respect to those petitioners whose criminal antecedent does not
tally but if after verification the criminal antecedent as recorded
hereinabove tallies with the petitioners 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.