Patna High Court
Deepak KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Kumar, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 153 litres of liquor from an auto. He asserted that he was not in possession of the vehicle, was not its owner, and was implicated solely on the basis of a confessional statement made by another accused in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent within six weeks. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act based on the facts presented.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co-accused, made in police custody, is sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the Court may condition anticipatory bail on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- confessional statement
- seizure of liquor
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2) BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80609 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2025 Thana- SAHAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Deepak Kumar S/O Bishnu Ram @ Kishun Ram R/O Village- Bansi-Dehri,
P.S- Sahar, Distt.- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramanuj Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 153 liters of liquor from an Auto.
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 Auto and he came to be implicated based on confessional
statement of apprehended accused 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.80609 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
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. 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 Sahar P.S. Case No. 179 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 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…