Patna High Court
Boby Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ BobyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged offences under several sections of the Bihar Narcotic and Smuggling Act and the Excise Act, alleging that no liquor was recovered from their personal possession and that the alleged recovery was from a jointly owned family house. They contended that the only evidence against them was a confessional statement made by Sujit Kumar while in police custody, which they argued lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, asserting the seriousness of the charges. The High Court, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482(2), granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to the filing of bail bonds of Rs.15,000 each and verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents. The order also stipulated that if the antecedent verification revealed undisclosed prior cases, the provisional bail would not be confirmed, otherwise it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in the present case under the inherent powers of the High Court.
- Whether the confessional statement made in police custody can be relied upon as evidence.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a jointly owned house implicates the petitioners.
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Smuggling Act — s. 115(2), 121(1), 126(2), 132, 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 45
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- excise offence
- narcotic offence
- high court inherent powers
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91436 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-386 Year-2025 Thana- NASRIGANJ District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Boby Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Boby S/O Nandu Yadav @ Jitendra Singh
R/o Village- Nasriganj, P.S.- Nasriganj, Dist.- Rohtas, Bihar
2. Raviranjan Yadav @ Ranjan Kumar S/O Mallu Yadav @ Dinesh Singh R/o
Village- Nasriganj, P.S.- Nasriganj, Dist.- Rohtas, Bihar
3. Sadhu Kumar S/O Ramashish Singh R/o Village- Nasriganj, P.S.- Nasriganj,
Dist.- Rohtas, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jai Prakash Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anish Chandra
======================================================
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
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 132, 351(2), 352, 3(5), 121(1) of the
B.N.S. and Sections 30(a), 45 of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner nos.1 and 2 are persons with clean antecedent and
petitioner no.3 has antecedent of three cases under the Excise
Act and the allegation is of recovery of 23 litres of liquor from
house of petitioner no.1.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91436 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a house, which does not belong to the
petitioner nos.2 and 3 and even the house in question is a joint
family property and thus, it cannot be alleged with certainty that
it was the petitioners, who had kept the liquor in the house or
the liquor kept in the house was within their knowledge and
they came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Sujit Kumar in police custody, which does not have any
evidentiary value.
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. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 Nasriganj P. S. Case No.386 of 2025, subject
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91436 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
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 and 2 have antecedent of even
one case and petitioner no.3 has antecedent of more than three
cases, 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 nos.1 and 2 have
antecedent of even one case and petitioner no.3 has antecedent
of three cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…