Patna High Court

Shyam Saw @ Ram KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of antecedents and compliance with Section 482(2) CrPC.

Summary

The petitioner, Shyam Saw alias Ram Kumar, was implicated in an excise case involving the alleged recovery of 275 litres of liquor and two bicycles, though he was not arrested at the scene and claimed the evidence was based on secret information. He has three prior cases under the Excise Act and sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than three prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if exactly three, the bail will be confirmed. The order is subject to the provisions of Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in the excise case.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the confirmation of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise offence
secret information
criminal antecedent
Section 482 CrPC
Bihar Prohibition Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91687 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2025 Thana- Hemjapur District- Munger
                 ======================================================
                 Shyam Saw @ Ram Kumar Son of Vijay Saw Resident of Village-Singhiya, P
                 S- Safiasarai District -Munger

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Uday Pratap Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-01-2026                  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 offence punishable under Sections 30(a) and

                   32 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 275 litres of liquor from a sack along

                   with two bicycles. It is next submitted that petitioner was not

                   arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his

                   conscious possession and is not the owner of any of the seized

                   bicycles and he came to be implicated based on secret

                   information which is the easiest way to implicate someone. It is

                   next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91687 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                            2/3




          relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically

          either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement

          or secret information without holding a proper investigation.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. 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 from today, be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen 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

          Hemjapur P.S. Case No.76/2025, subject to the conditions as

          laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

          shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than

          three cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner

          had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

          provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

          on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of three
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91687 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                       be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…