Patna High Court
Pardeshi NutversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of five litres of liquor. He argued that the liquor was not found in his possession, the FIR omitted the informant’s name, and the investigation was mechanically initiated without proper inquiry. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.5,000 bail bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case exists, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- FIR
- police investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84878 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-305 Year-2025 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Pardeshi Nut S/o Laxman Nut @ Laxman Nat R/o Village - Bagdiha, P.s -
Panapur, District - Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd.(App), APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 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
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the excise act and
allegation is of recovery of 5 liters of liquor from a bag.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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 he came to be implicated at the instance of local person, but
then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84878 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion
on the case of the prosecution. It is also 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 Panapur
P.S. Case No. 305 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84878 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this 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 only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…