Patna High Court
Anil Kumar Ray @ Anil Kumar Rai @ Anil Rai @ Anil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions and verification of the petitioners' antecedent cases.
Summary
The petitioners, Anil Kumar Ray and Sudhir Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act involving the recovery of 4,942.080 litres of liquor from a truck. They argued that they were not arrested at the spot, had no possession of the seized liquor, and were implicated solely on a confessional statement made by Rajesh while in police custody, which they claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioners' prior three cases under the Excise Act. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioners be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000 each with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC and verification of their criminal antecedent. The court clarified that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed, granting provisional anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC to the petitioners accused of offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of Rajesh recorded in police custody is admissible as evidence for granting bail.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedent (more than three cases) affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- confessional statement
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6626 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2025 Thana- Pahelja P.S. District- Saran
======================================================
1. Anil Kumar Ray @ Anil Kumar Rai @ Anil Rai @ Anil Kumar Son of
Jhulan Ray @ Jhulan Rai R/o - Village - Pahaleja Shahpur, Diyara, P.S. -
Sonpur, Dist. - Saran.
2. Sudhir Kumar Son of Lalbabu Ray @ Lalbabu Rai R/o Village - Sabalpur
Pachhiyari Tola, P.S. - Sonpur, Dist. - Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramchandra Sahni
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners have antecedent of three cases under the Excise
Act and the allegation is of recovery of 4942.080 litres of liquor
from a truck.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6626 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
2/3
of the seized truck and they came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Rajesh in police custody, which does
not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that police
in majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at the
behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and
confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding
proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs. 1,5000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 Pahaleja P. S. Case No.01 of 2025, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6626 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
3/3
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of more than three
cases, then it would be presumed that petitioners for the
purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if
on verification, it is found that petitioners have antecedent of
three cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall be confirmed forthwith.
9. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners based on instruction submits that
petitioners undertake to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- with
Advocates’ Association, Patna High Court, Patna.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…