Patna High Court
BISHNU KUMAR SINGH @ BISHNU KUMARversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Bishnu Kumar Singh, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 concerning alleged recovery of 100 litres of liquor from the premises of Akhilesh Kumar. He contended that he was not arrested on the spot, had no possession of the liquor, and had no relationship with the alleged owner, asserting that the complaint was motivated by an inimical relationship with the watchman. The State opposed the bail application. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and compliance with the conditions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order further directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and conditionally confirm the bail if only one prior case is found, otherwise the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent affects the confirmation of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- BNSS
- criminal antecedent
- liquor seizure
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7407 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-372 Year-2025 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
BISHNU KUMAR SINGH @ BISHNU KUMAR S/O BHIKHARI YADAV
@ BHIKHARI SINGH R/o vill - Neu Pokhar, P.S.- Jagdishpur, Distt.-
Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shrish Anurag, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, 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 (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of
100 litres of liquor from the premise of Akhilesh Kumar.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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 belong to the petitioner and
petitioner has no concern or relation with Akhilesh Kumar. It is
further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance
of the Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7407 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
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, 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.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 Jagdishpur P.S.
Case No. 372 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 one case, 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 one case
in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…