Patna High Court
Om Prakash RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court ordered provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Om Prakash Ray, 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 3.5 litres of liquor from a Safari car. He contended that he was not caught in possession, was not the owner of the vehicle, and the only link to the offence was a confessional statement made by another accused while in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. The order further stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas a clean record would lead to immediate confirmation. The decision was based on the principles of Section 482(2) of the BNSS and the lack of direct possession or ownership by the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the petitioner is not found in possession of the alleged contraband
- Whether a confessional statement of another accused in police custody can form the basis for arrest
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants provisional bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72087 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-730 Year-2023 Thana- RAJIVNAGAR District- Patna
======================================================
Om Prakash Ray S/o- Mala Ray R/o Mohalla- Vijay Singh Road No.3,
Ashiyana Nagar P.S. Rajiv Nagar District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Jyoti Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-01-2026 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) and 41(1) 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 3.5 liters of liquor from a Safari car.
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 the
seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on confessional
statement of apprehended accused in police custody which does not
have any evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72087 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
2/2
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 Rajiv Nagar P.S. Case No. 730 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…