Patna High Court
Durga Chaudhary @ Durga Kumar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond and verification of criminal antecedents, with confirmation contingent on accurate disclosure.
Summary
Durga Chaudhary and Milan Kumar applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, alleging that the liquor was recovered from a location not belonging to them and that the case is based solely on a confessional statement made by an accused in police custody, which they contend lacks evidentiary value. The petitioners disclosed prior criminal antecedents—seven cases for Durga and one for Milan—while the State opposed the bail. The Court considered the submissions and, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 35,000 with two sureties each. The order further directed the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedents and to confirm the bail only if the disclosed antecedents are accurate; otherwise, the bail would not be confirmed. The decision balances the petitioners' claim of lack of possession and questionable evidence against the seriousness of the excise offence and their prior records.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in an excise offence case where the alleged recovery is from a place not owned by the accused and the primary evidence is a confessional statement made in police custody.
- Whether the petitioners' disclosed criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a) Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482 CrPC
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.843 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-219 Year-2025 Thana- KISHANPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Durga Chaudhary @ Durga Kumar Chaudhary Son of Ramdev Chaudhary
Resident of Village-Sohagpur, Ward no.4, P.S.-Kishanpur, District-Supaul.
2. Milan Kumar Son of Kamleshwari Choudhary Resident of Village-
Kumarganj, Ward no.12, P.S.-Kishanpur, District-Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md Shadab Alam Wazdi
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of seven cases out of which 5
cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 2 has
antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of 936.540
litres of liquor from bamboo-sheet room of Md. Sahid.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.843 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and petitioners have no concern or relation with Md.
Shahid and they came to be implicated based on 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 petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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.
35,000/- (Rupees Thirty-five Thousand) each 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 Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 219 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section Section 482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.843 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the
event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more
than seven cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner
who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but
after verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent
of seven cases and petitioner no. 2 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…