Patna High Court
Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that liquor and Mahua flowers were seized from a vehicle he did not own. He argued that the police relied on secret information without proper investigation and that nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, 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 antecedent. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- seizure of liquor
- secret information
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89922 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2025 Thana- TANKUPPA District- Gaya
======================================================
Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Yadav S/O Harinandan Yadav R/O Village -
Bagaie, P.S. - Gurpa, District - Gaya ji.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prithivi Raj Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 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 30(a) and
30(d) of the 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 340.200 litres of liquor from a pick-
up along with 1600 Kg. of Mahua Flower which was destroyed
at the spot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89922 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
be implicated based on the secret information which is the
easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper
investigation of the case. It is next submitted that once an
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start
implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information.
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, let 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 Tankuppa
P.S. Case No. 211 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89922 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…