Patna High Court
Shyam BabuversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to a bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Shyam Babu, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that the alleged liquor recovery was from a public place and not in his possession. He argued that the police were mechanically implicating him without proper investigation, and that he had only one prior case under the Excise Act. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and verification of his criminal antecedents. The order clarified that if more than one antecedent case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one antecedent is found, the provisional bail will be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. can be imposed on anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83528 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-487 Year-2024 Thana- BARHARIA District- Siwan
======================================================
Shyam Babu S/O Shivji Prasad Resident of vill.- Gosihata Dhoom Nagar,
P.S.- Barhariya, Dist.- Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kumari Anupam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar
Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 24 litres of liquor from a place near
Nabiganj Daha river bridge. 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 and is
accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that once
an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83528 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
starts implicating mechanically without holding a proper
investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bond in the
sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of
Exclusive Special Excise Court No.-1, Siwan in connection with
Barhariya P.S. Case No.487 of 2024, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioner 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
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83528 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of only one case, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…