Patna High Court
Ajay Rai @ Swaminath AryavalaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Rai, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for alleged recovery of 575.64 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He claimed he was not arrested at the spot and that the liquor could not be conclusively linked to him, also highlighting his antecedent of eleven prior cases, seven under the Excise Act. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing lack of conscious possession and procedural lapses in the investigation. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bond of Rs.55,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent; if more than eleven cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. given the nature of the offence and his criminal antecedent.
- Whether the joint family ownership of the property negates the petitioner’s knowledge and possession of the liquor.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 438 CrPC
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7406 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Samastipur
======================================================
Ajay Rai @ Swaminath Aryavala S/o Late Suresh Rai Resident of Village -
Dudhpura, Ward No. 04, P.S - Samastipur (Mufassil), District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner has antecedent of eleven cases out of which seven
cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
575.64 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who
had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7406 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
was within his knowledge. It is next submitted that petitioner
came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar but then
it is submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either
at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, secret
information or confessional statement without holding a proper
investigation of the case.
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, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.55,000/- (Rupees Fifty-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 Sadar Excise P.S.
Case No. 155 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than eleven
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7406 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only eleven cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…