Patna High Court
Raju Rai @ Raju KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Raju Rai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a), 33 and 34 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that 280 litres of spirit were recovered from a bush near his house but not from his possession. He argued that the complainant, the Chawkidar, failed to inform police earlier, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case, and that the police mechanically implicated him without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If more than one antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under the circumstances?
- Whether the alleged recovery of spirit from a location not in the petitioner’s possession justifies arrest?
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the confirmation of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Substance (BNSS) Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- seizure of spirit
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Cr.P.C. Section 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.518 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2025 Thana- AMNAUR District- Saran
======================================================
Raju Rai @ Raju Kumar Son of Punit Rai @ Umesh Rai R/o Village - Sahadi,
P.S. - Amnour, District - Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 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), 33
and 34 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,
2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 280 litres of spirit from a bush near a
graveyard and near the new house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
but then is adjacent to his new house, as such, he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.518 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar and local persons
but then it is submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the
involvement of petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not
inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which
casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is further
submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the
instance of the Chawkidar, local person, secret information or
confessional statement without holding a proper investigation of
the case.
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, let 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.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Amnour
P.S. Case No. 255 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.518 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…