Patna High Court
Ramesh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramesh Rai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 1,950 litres of liquor from a pit and two scooters. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, he does not own the seized vehicles, and his name was omitted from the FIR, indicating a weak prosecution case. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If the verification shows only one prior case, the bail will be confirmed; if more than one, the bail will not be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482 of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in the circumstances of the case.
- Whether the omission of the petitioner’s name from the FIR and lack of possession of the seized liquor affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent should influence the confirmation of the provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- section 438
- section 482
- criminal antecedent
- FIR omission
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90788 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-589 Year-2025 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna
======================================================
Ramesh Rai S/o Harish Ray R/o Village - East Nandgola, P.S - Malsalami,
District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sharda Kumari, 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.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 1950 litres of liquor from a place
near a pit and from two Scooty.
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 any of the seized vehicles and
came to be implicated at the instance of the local persons but
then it is submitted that the name of the person who disclosed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90788 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. 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 without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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
Malsalami P.S. Case No. 589 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482 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.90788 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
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…