Patna High Court
Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The application for anticipatory bail is allowed, subject to conditions and verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents.
Summary
Petitioners Chandan Kumar and Chhotu Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 40 litres of liquor. They argued that they were not arrested at the spot, did not have possession of the liquor, and were implicated by a watchman who failed to inform police earlier. The State opposed the bail, citing their prior criminal antecedents—three cases for petitioner 1 (two under the Excise Act) and one case for petitioner 2. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs 1,000 bail bond with two sureties each, and directed verification of their antecedents. It held that if verification shows the antecedents exceed the disclosed numbers, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act given the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether the alleged involvement of a watchman and lack of immediate arrest affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the disclosed antecedent details are sufficient for the Court to grant anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91305 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-364 Year-2024 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL District-
Begusarai
======================================================
1. Chandan Kumar S/O Tiro Yadav @ Piro Yadav R/O Vill.- Raghunathpur,P.S-
Sahebpur Kamal,Dist- Begusarai
2. Chhotu Kumar S/O Tiro Yadav @ Piro Yadav R/O Vill.- Raghunathpur,P.S-
Sahebpur Kamal,Dist- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Yadav
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of three cases out of which
two cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner no.2 has
antecedent of one case and the allegation is of recovery of 40
litres of liquor from near a brick-kiln
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91305 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner
of the brick-kiln and he came to be implicated at the instance of
Chaukidar. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of
the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why
he did not inform the police prior to institution of the present
F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It
is next submitted that police in majority of cases implicating
innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person,
secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical
manner without holding proper investigation without holding a
proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) each 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 Sahebpur Kamal P. S. Case No.364 of 2024,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91305 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of more than
three cases and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of more than one
case, then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes
of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their antecedent
before this Court, in that event, the present provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on
verification, it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of
three cases only and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of one case
only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…