Patna High Court

Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 50 litres of liquor from a public area near a Mazar. He was not arrested at the scene and no liquor was found in his possession; the allegation stemmed from a hostile watchman (chowkidar). The petitioner, who has a clean antecedent, sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the watchman could have informed police earlier if he truly knew of his involvement. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the facts and the petitioner's clean record, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of his antecedent, after which the bail would be confirmed if no prior cases are found.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession justify provisional anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
clean antecedent
provisional bail
Section 482
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78640 of 2025
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- PIRO District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Rahul Kumar Son of Harendra Yadav @ Harendra Singh R/o Village -
                 Laharabad, P.S. - Piro, District - Bhojpur.

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar =

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Diwakar .
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   16-03-2026               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 the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 50 litres of liquor from a place near a Mazar.

                             4.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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 is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated

                   at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78640 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026
                                            2/3




          term. It is next submitted that if the Chowkidar was aware

          about the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then

          why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the

          instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the

          prosecution, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean

          antecedent.

                   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, 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. 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 Piro P.S. Case No. 67 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 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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78640 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        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)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…