Patna High Court
Anshu Singh @ Anshu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted provisionally subject to a bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents in the case of an alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018-22.
Summary
The petitioner, Anshu Singh, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018-22 for alleged recovery of 1,656 litres of beer from land adjacent to his house. He asserted a clean criminal record and that no liquor was found in his possession, arguing that the allegation was based on secret information. The State opposed the bail. The High 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 antecedents. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018-22.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions may be imposed on provisional anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018-22 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82290 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1970 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Anshu Singh @ Anshu Kumar S/O Satendra Singh Resident of Village-
Bahlolpur, P.S- Paroo, Distt.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sagar Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-01-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018-22.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 1656 litres of beer from a place adjacent to his
house. It is next submitted 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 implicated based on secret information
which is the easiest way to implicate someone.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82290 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
2/2
5. 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 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 Excise
P.S. Case No.1970/2024, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.