Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to verification of antecedents; confirmation depends on the number of prior cases.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 58.1 litres of liquor from a government school corner. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, had no possession, and the allegation stemmed solely from a chowkidar’s statement, questioning the adequacy of police investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If the verification shows more than one prior case, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable... (B.N.S.S.) and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the absence of possession and the reliance on a chowkidar’s statement justify denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- Section 30
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88834 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-392 Year-2025 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Rahul Kumar Son of Ram Sevak Mahto Ward No. 12, Resident of Village-
Majhauli @ Bhanudih, P.S.- Runisaidpur, Distt.- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 58.1 litres of liquor from a corner of
a Government School. It is next submitted that 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 at the instance of
chowkidar but then it is submitted that if chowkidar was aware
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88834 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
of the involvement of the petitioner in the instant case 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 next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically
either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement
or secret information without holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. 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 from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5000/- (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
Runisaidpur P.S. Case No.392/2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88834 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…