Patna High Court

Ravi Ranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

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

Holding

The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Ravi Ranjan Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 13.5 litres of liquor recovered from a plastic bag. He asserted that he has a clean criminal record, was not arrested at the spot, and had no control over the bag, claiming that the chaukidar’s delayed reporting casts doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, and ordered verification of the petitioner’s antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 438 CrPC
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
clean antecedent
liquor seizure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90553 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-672 Year-2025 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Ravi Ranjan Kumar S/O Suresh Singh Resident of Village- Haujpura, P.S.-
                 Vaishali (Belsar OP), Distt.- Vaishali.
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Shivjee Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Arun Kumar, 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 Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 13.500 litres of liquor from a plastic bag.

                                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 does not belong to the petitioner

                   and the petitioner has no concern with the bag in question. It is

                   further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the

                   instance of the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90553 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

          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 Vaishali

          (Belsar O.P.) P.S. Case No. 672 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.90553 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…