Patna High Court

Amresh RayversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 8 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of antecedents under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

The petitioner, Amresh Ray, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 432 litres of liquor from a public riverbank. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the location did not belong to him, and the complaint was lodged by a chowkidar who had not informed police earlier, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents within six weeks. It directed that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the bail would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the circumstances of alleged possession and the role of the chowkidar justify granting bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30
possession
public place
bail conditions
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90225 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-315 Year-2025 Thana- SUPPI District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Amresh Ray S/o Ram Balak Ray @ Ram Balak Prasad Resident of Village -
                 Rampur Kanth, PS- Suppi, District- Sitamarhi

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-01-2026                  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 Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case under the excise act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 432 liters of liquor from a place near

                   a river.

                                4. 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 is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90225 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                            2/3




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

          Chowkidar was aware of 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.

                       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.

          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 Suppi

          P.S. Case No. 315 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 more

          than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the

          purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90225 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional

                      anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after

                      verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one

                      case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                      shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…