Patna High Court
Ajit @ Ajit Kumar Rai @ PepaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajit Kumar Rai, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 17.28 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He argued that he was not caught in possession, was not the vehicle's owner, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by Virendra while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order is subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents; if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act given the facts?
- Does the confessional statement of Virendra, made in police custody, constitute sufficient evidence to deny anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7470 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2025 Thana- Ramdas Rai Ka Dera District- Buxar
======================================================
Ajit @ Ajit Kumar Rai @ Pepa Son of Lalan Rai Resident of Village -
Rajapur Benilal Ka Dera, P.S.- Ram Das Rai Ka Dera, District - Buxar, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP
======================================================
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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery
of 17.28 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 Virendra 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.7470 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
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. 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 Ram Das Rai Ka Dera
P.S. Case No. 42 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 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 only, in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…