Patna High Court
Rajesh Kumar KamtiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar Kamti, was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly transporting 118.480 litres of liquor in a Scorpio vehicle. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and that the vehicle was not his, contrary to the charge sheet. The prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody, which the petitioner contended lacked evidentiary value. The court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond and two sureties, and that the trial court verify his antecedents within six weeks. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be made absolute.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused can form the basis for arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged ownership of the vehicle is material to the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(3)
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- vehicle ownership
- Section 482(2) BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45471 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-607 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Rajesh Kumar Kamti S/o Tribhuwan Kamti R/o Ward No. 25, Railway
Colony, T/B (B), Daymarket, P.S.- Kishanganj, District- Kishanganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pronoti Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-07-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 118.480 liters of liquor from a Scorpio vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession. It is submitted
that the order impugned wrongly records that petit is the owner
of the seized vehicle when petitioner is not the owner of the
vehicle, as has been specifically pleaded at Para-8 of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45471 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
2/3
anticipatory bail application and he came to be implicated based
on confessional statement of Prakash in police custody which
does not have any evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
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 Trial Court
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 Madya
Nisedh P.S. Case No. 607 of 2026 subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
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
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45471 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.