Patna High Court
Binod ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Binod Choudhary, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018, alleging recovery of 210 litres of liquor from a location adjacent to his house. He contended that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the FIR omitted the name of the informant, and the police had mechanically implicated him without proper investigation. He also pointed out a clerical error in the record of his criminal antecedents, claiming he had four prior cases, not five as recorded. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and conditioned the confirmation of bail on verification of the petitioner’s antecedent record by the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the alleged procedural defects – lack of informant’s name in the FIR and erroneous recording of criminal antecedents – warrant the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- procedural defect
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83160 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-317 Year-2025 Thana- HASPURA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Binod Choudhary S/o Late Rameshar Chaudhary R/o Village- Raghunath
Bigha, P.S - Haspura, District - Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Adarsh Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akbar Ali, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-01-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
30(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,
2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of four cases only but then the
impugned order inadvertently records that petitioner has
antecedent of five cases.
4. In view of the said submission made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the defect as
pointed out by the office is hereby ignored.
5. Allegation is of recovery of 210 litres of liquor
from a place beside the house of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83160 of 2025(2) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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
but then is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted
that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local
person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name
of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that
once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the
police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation of the case.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
8. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let 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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83160 of 2025(2) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Haspura P.S. Case No. 317 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the
BNSS.
9. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than four cases,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only four cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…