Patna High Court
Vindeshwari Sardar @ Bindi SardarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Vindeshwari Sardar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of 30 litres of liquor from a location adjacent to his house. He asserted a clean criminal record and argued that the liquor was not found in his possession and that the complainant, the chawkidar, failed to inform police earlier, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500, two sureties of the same amount, and verification of his antecedent by the trial court within six weeks. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, with a condition that the bail may be cancelled if any prior case is discovered. The provisional bail will be confirmed if the verification confirms his clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90425 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2025 Thana- CHHATAPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
Vindeshwari Sardar @ Bindi Sardar S/o Late Sahdev Sardar R/o Vill-
Narhiya, Ward No. 1, P.S.- Chhatapur, Distt- Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Naresh Kumar Mehta, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 30 litres of liquor from a place behind the house of
the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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 is adjacent to the house of the
petitioner, thus, based on suspicion he came to be implicated at
the instance of the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90425 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the
occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the
institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution, 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, 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.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
Chhatapur P.S. Case No. 295 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
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 even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90425 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…