Patna High Court
Sonu Nut @ Sonu NatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, three residents of Bajit Bhoraha, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 120 litres of liquor and 2000 litres of Mahua pass. They contended that the alleged seizure was from a public place, that nothing was recovered from their conscious possession, and that the police had mechanically implicated them based on a chowkidar’s statement without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioners' extensive criminal antecedents. The Court, after hearing counsel, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.45,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioners' criminal records. It further held that if the verification shows more antecedent cases than claimed, the provisional bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the bail would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bihar Excise Act offences.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the police investigation and the basis of the FIR are sufficient to deny bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482
- police investigation
- public place
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61999 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-247 Year-2025 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
======================================================
1. Sonu Nut @ Sonu Nat S/O Daharu Nut @ Dharu Nat R/O Village - Bajit
Bhoraha, P.S. - Marhowarah, District - Saran
2. Kali Nut @ Kali Nat S/O Saral Nat R/O Village - Bajit Bhoraha, P.S. -
Marhowarah, District - Saran
3. Bali Nut @ Bali Nat S/O Daharu Nut @ Daharu Nat R/O Village - Bajit
Bhoraha, P.S. - Marhowarah, District - Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-01-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of seven cases, petitioner no. 2
has antecedent of nine cases and petitioner no. 3 has antecedent
of eight cases, out of which 6, 6 and 5 cases are under the excise
cases respectively and allegation is of recovery of 120 liters of
liquor from Chanwar of village Bajitbhorha along with 2000
liters of Mahua pass which was destroyed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61999 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
petitioners were not apprehended 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 the
petitioners and is accessible to public at large. It is also
submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the
instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or
secret information without holding a proper investigation. It is
further submitted that in the instant case, the petitioners came to
be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar, but then it is
submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the involvement of
the petitioners in the occurrence then why he did not inform the
police prior to institution of the instant FIR which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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.
45,000/- (Rupees Forty Five Thousand) each with two sureties
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61999 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Court where the case is pending/successor court in connection
with Marhowrah P.S. Case No. 247 of 2025 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 petitioners and
in the event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
more than seven cases, petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more
than nine cases and petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of more than
eight cases then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
seven cases only, petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of nine cases
only and petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of eight cases only, in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…