Patna High Court
Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
Vikash Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after a FIR was lodged alleging his involvement in the recovery of 2,142 litres of liquor from five vehicles, offences punishable under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The petitioner asserted that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the scene, did not have the liquor in his conscious possession, and was not the owner of the seized vehicles; the only link to the case was a confessional statement made by another accused in police custody, which the petitioner argued lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioned the confirmation of bail on verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. The order further stipulated that any undisclosed prior case would lead to the revocation of the bail, while a clean record would result in immediate confirmation.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in view of the allegations and the nature of evidence.
- Whether the confessional statement of another accused, made in police custody, can be the basis for denying anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275, 3(5)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- confessional statement
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91569 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2025 Thana- RAMPUR HARI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Vikash Kumar Son of Raghbendra Ray Resident of Village- Gosaipur
Tengrahan, Mal Toli, P.S.- Rampurhari, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-01-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the
BNS as well as Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 2142 litres of liquor from five different vehicles as
detailed in the FIR.
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 based on the confessional statement of apprehended
accused in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91569 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
2/2
in the eye of law.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 104 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) 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 even one case, 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that
event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…