Patna High Court
Rakesh Pashi @ Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC conditions.
Summary
Rakesh Pashi applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act alleging recovery of 100.8 litres of liquor from a rented house. He argued that he was not arrested, had no liquor in his possession, and was implicated based on secret information. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC. The court directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and to confirm the bail only if he has at most one prior case; otherwise, the bail would not be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of arrest and lack of possession of the alleged contraband affect the grant of anticipatory 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)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91328 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-528 Year-2025 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Rakesh Pashi @ Rakesh Kumar S/o Late Subhash Pashi R/o vill - Husepur,
P.S.- Bhore, Distt.- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Iftekhar Mahmood
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 100.8 litres of liquor from rented house of Mankesh
Chauhan.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the house in question and he came to be implicated based on
secret information, which is the easiest way to implicate
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91328 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
someone. 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 a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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 Bhore P. S. Case No.528 of 2025, 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 petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91328 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his 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 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…