Patna High Court
Komal Mauraya @ VishalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Komal Mauraya and Vijay Maurya, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 1111.60 litres of liquor. They argued that they were not arrested at the spot, had no possession of the seized vehicle, and that the case against them relied solely on a confessional statement of another accused, which they claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioners' multiple prior criminal cases, including NDPS offences, and the risk of them absconding if bail were granted. The court considered the submissions and the petitioners' antecedents, and concluded that anticipatory bail should not be extended. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners in a case under Section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co-accused provides sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents justify refusal of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(A)
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedents
- liquor seizure
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90970 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-134 Year-2025 Thana- DURGAWATI District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
1. Komal Mauraya @ Vishal Son of Sabhajeet @ Sambhajeet Maurya Resident
of Village - Nawpadwa(Churawanpur), P.S. - Baksha, Dist. - Jaunpur(U.P.).
2. Vijay Maurya @ Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Kumar Maurya Son of Sitaram @
Sitaram Maurya @ Seetaram Resident of Village -
Nawpadwa(Churawanpur), P.S. - Baksha, Dist. - Jaunpur(U.P.).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Durgawati P.S. Case No.134/2025, registered for the
offences punishable under Section 30(A) of Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 has antecedent of six cases and petitioner no.2
has antecedent of five cases and allegation is of recovery of
1111.60 litres of liquor from a pick up vehicle. It is next
submitted that petitioners were not arrested from the spot as
such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90970 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/2
are not the owners of any of the seized vehicle and they came to
be implicated based on confessional statement of apprehended
accused in police custody which does not have any evidentiary
value.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that no
doubt petitioners were not arrested from the spot and their name
transpired on the confessional statement but then petitioners are
resident of U.P. and they are involved in several cases including
NDPS and in the event if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted
to the petitioners, in that event, the petitioners may abscond.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioners
is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…