Patna High Court

Amarjit KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 7 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.

Summary

Amarjit Kumar sought anticipatory bail after a FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 102 litres of liquor from a public area near an Ahar. The petitioner argued that the liquor was not in his possession, the location was accessible to the public, and the informant (chowkidar) did not report the matter earlier, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the provisional bail would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the circumstances of the alleged recovery and the role of the informant justify granting bail.
Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the confirmation of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
liquor seizure
criminal antecedent
Section 30
Section 482
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69537 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2025 Thana- BANDEYA District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Amarjit Kumar S/o Udal Bind R/o Village- Shekhpura, P.S.- Bandeya,
                 District- Aurangabad

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms.Mukul Kumari
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Rabindra Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   07-01-2026               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 Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 102 litres of liquor from a place near an Ahar beside

                   the road.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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 belongs to the

                   petitioner and is accessible to public at large and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69537 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
                                            2/3




          implicated at the instance of Chowkidar but then it is submitted

          that if the Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the

          petitioner 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 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.

          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 Bandeya

          P.S. Case No. 78 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 petitioner and

          in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more

          than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the

          purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69537 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after

                        verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one

                        case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be

                        confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…