Patna High Court
Guddu ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted where the petitioner is not in immediate possession of the alleged contraband and his criminal antecedent is limited, subject to verification.
Summary
Guddu Choudhary applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 20 litres of liquor from his joint family house. The petitioner argued that he was not arrested at the spot, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and the house being a joint family property made it uncertain that he had knowledge of the liquor. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than one antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one antecedent is found, the bail would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the context of alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and the joint family nature of the property justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- joint family property
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84036 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2025 Thana- PARANDABAR District- Nawada
======================================================
Guddu Choudhary S/O Late Jago Choudhary Resident of Village- Karigidhi,
P.S- Parnadabar, Distt.- Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amit Ranjan
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Suman Kumari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 20 litres of liquor from the
house of the petitioner.
4. The 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 house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84036 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was
aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence,
then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the
present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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 Parnadabar P. S. Case No.254 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84036 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
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
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…