Patna High Court
Ram Karan Kumar @ Ram Karan Mukhiya @ Ram Karan MukhiyanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail pending verification of his antecedent, as the prosecution’s case rests on a confessional statement lacking evidentiary weight and no possession was established.
Summary
The petitioner, Ram Karan Kumar, was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 1,821 litres of liquor from 62 jute bags on 13 bicycles. He was not arrested at the scene, no liquor or bicycles were found in his possession, and he is not the owner of the bicycles. The prosecution’s case relied primarily on a confessional statement made by a co-accused, Arjun, while in police custody, which the petitioner’s counsel argued lacks evidentiary value. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, asserting a clean antecedent and the weakness of the evidence. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 500 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The order stipulates that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the CrPC given the nature of the allegations and lack of possession.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a co-accused in police custody can form the basis for denying anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- possession
- Section 30 Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482 CrPC
- high court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.649 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2023 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Ram Karan Kumar @ Ram Karan Mukhiya @ Ram Karan Mukhiyan S/o
Hari Narayan Mukhiya R/o Village - Masha Alam @ Masaha Alam, P.S. -
Bairganiya, District - Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP
======================================================
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)(c) 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 1821 liters of liquor from 62 jute bags on 13 bicycles.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of any
of the seized bicycles and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Arjun in police custody which does not
have any evidentiary value.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.649 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/2
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 Bairgania P.S. Case No. 217 of 2023 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 anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…