Patna High Court
Dhaneshwar PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhaneshwar Pandit, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 128.625 litres of liquor from an e‑rickshaw. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, no liquor was seized from his possession, he was not the vehicle's owner, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by an accused in police custody, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bail bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The court stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged seizure was not from the petitioner’s possession and the charge is based on a confessional statement of an accused in police custody.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
- Section 30
- Section 482
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.824 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-425 Year-2025 Thana- MADHUBANI TOWN District-
Madhubani
======================================================
Dhaneshwar Pandit S/O Madhulal Pandit R/o Vill.- Baira Parsa, P.S.-
Jaynagar, District - Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Alias Ashok Karn
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 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 the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 128.625 litres of liquor from a e-
rickshaw.
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 is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.824 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
confessional statement of apprehended-accused in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is further
submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the
instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or
secret information without holding a proper investigation.
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 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 Madhubani Town P.S.
Case No. 425 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.824 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
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 in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…