Patna High Court
Sumit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Sumit Kumar and Arun Kumar, were implicated in a case involving the alleged recovery of 27.9 liters of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. Sumit Kumar was arrested during the pendency of his anticipatory bail application, which was subsequently withdrawn with the court's permission. Arun Kumar, claiming a clean antecedent and no direct involvement, sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the liquor was recovered from a location not belonging to him and that he was implicated due to personal enmity with a chowkidar. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted Arun Kumar provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and a six‑week window for surrender, and ordered verification of his criminal antecedent before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to Arun Kumar under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act given the facts of the case.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged clean antecedent justifies the grant of provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- High Court
- Criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84886 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-353 Year-2025 Thana- BAKHARI District- Begusarai
======================================================
1. Sumit Kumar S/O Arun Kumar R/O Village - Udaypur (Udaipur), P.S-
Bakhri, District - Begusarai
2. Arun Kumar S/O Ram Chandra Mahto R/O Village - Udaypur (Udaipur),
P.S- Bakhri, District - Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivam Prerna, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners, at the
outset, seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail
application with respect to petitioner no. 1 (Sumit Kumar) who
was arrested during pendency of the same.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. The petitioner no. 2 apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84886 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
recovery of 27.9 liters of liquor from hut of Sumit Kumar.
6. 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 petitioner has no concern or relation with Sumit, but then
being co-villager he came to be implicated at the instance of
Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term.
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, the petitioner no. 2 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.
500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Bakhri
P.S. Case No. 353 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
9. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner no. 2 and in
the event if it is found that petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of even
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84886 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
one case then it would be presumed that petitioner no. 2 for the
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 no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…