Patna High Court
Haresh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to conditions and verification of antecedent.
Summary
Haresh Kumar applied for anticipatory bail anticipating arrest under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 3.495 litres of liquor from a place adjacent to his house. He asserted a clean antecedent and that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, questioning the chaukidar’s delay in reporting. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail‑bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC and verification of his antecedent. The order further provided that the bail would be cancelled if any prior case is discovered, otherwise it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC in the present case
- Whether the petitioner has a clean criminal antecedent
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor constitutes an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- bail bonds
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7426 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-641 Year-2025 Thana- DARIYAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Haresh Kumar Son of Jagdish Ray Resident of Village -Banawaripur PS-
Dariyapur Distt -Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Udai Shankar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 3.495 litres of liquor from a place behind the hut
of the petitioner.
4. The 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 alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the
petitioner, but then, is adjacent to his house and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7426 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of Chaukidar, but then, it is submitted
that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner
in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to
institution of the present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Dariyapur P. S. Case No.641 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 petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7426 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his 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
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…