Patna High Court
Arvind ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bond, sureties and verification of criminal antecedents.
Summary
Four petitioners applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case alleging violation of Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 25 litres of liquor from a mango orchard. The petitioners argued that they were not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in their possession, and the alleged recovery occurred on public land, with the informant’s identity omitted from the FIR. The State opposed the bail. The High Court directed that, upon arrest or surrender within six weeks, the petitioners be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 each with two sureties, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents; if the antecedents exceed what was disclosed, the bail may be revoked. The court therefore allowed the anticipatory bail application with these conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the absence of arrest at the scene and lack of possession of the alleged contraband affect the bail decision.
- Whether the conditions imposed (bond, sureties, verification of antecedents) satisfy the requirements for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
- provisional bail
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90148 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-600 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDI District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Arvind Chaudhary Son of Mithilesh Chaudhary R/O Village - Kakaiya, P.S.
Nalanda, Dist Nalanda.
2. Guddu Kumar Son of late Bindeshwar Kewat Resident of Village -
Kachalpur, P.S. - Chandi, District-Nalanda
3. Mahto Chaudhary Son of Late Krishna Chaudhary Resident of Village -
Kachalpur, P.S. - Chandi, District-Nalanda
4. Bitthal Kumar @ Bitthal Chaudhary son of Prakash Chaudhary Resident of
Village - Kachalpur, P.S. - Chandi, District-Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Shaheen Begum
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise
Act and petitioner nos.2, 3 and 4 have antecedent of one case
and the allegation is of recovery of 25 litres of liquor from a
mango orchard.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90148 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the
petitioners and is accessible to public at large and they came to
be implicated at the instance of local person, but the name of the
person, who disclosed the name of the petitioners is not
disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of
the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each 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 Chandi P. S. Case No.600 of 2025, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90148 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of more than
two cases and petitioner nos.2, 3 4 have antecedent of even one
case, then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes
of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their antecedent
before this Court, in that event, the present provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on
verification, it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of
two cases only and petitioner nos.2, 3 4 have antecedent of even
one case only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…