Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ravindra RaiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Ravindra Rai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, alleging recovery of 140 litres of liquor and 2000 litres of mahua from a public riverbank. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no contraband was found in his possession, and the alleged recovery occurred at a place open to the public, with the complainant (a chowkidar) failing to inform police earlier, suggesting false implication. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the petitioner's clean antecedent and the circumstances, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 500 bond and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify his antecedent before confirming the bail. The order also warned that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be presumed obtained by concealment and not confirmed. The court thus conditionally protected the petitioner pending trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances described.
  • Whether the alleged offences under Sections 274, 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act warrant denial of anticipatory bail.
  • Whether the lack of possession and the public nature of the alleged recovery site affect the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • clean antecedent
  • public place
  • false implication
  • liquor seizure
  • mahua
  • Section 274
  • Section 275
  • Section 30(a)
  • Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
  • Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85220 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2025 Thana- KESARIA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Ravindra Rai S/o Jokhan Rai R/o Village - Kadhan Ward No. 9, P.S -
                 Kesariya, District - East Champaran

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Abhishek Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms.Veena Kumari Jaiswal
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-01-2026               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 Sections 274 and

                   275 of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 140 litres of liquor from a place near a river and

                   2000 litres of mahua pass which was destroyed.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85220 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
                                            2/3




          at the instance of Chowkidar but then it is submitted that if the

          Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the petitioner in

          the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to

          institution of the instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the

          case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that it appears

          that Chowkidar in order to save the real culprit falsely

          implicated the petitioner, when petitioner admittedly is a person

          with clean antecedent.

                   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.

          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 Kesariya

          P.S. Case No. 402 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 even one case
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85220 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        then it would be presumed that petitioner, 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 is a

                        person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.