Patna High Court

Shivji RamversusThe State of Bihar

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

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Shivji Ram, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly recovering 45 litres of liquor from a bush on land belonging to another person. He asserted that he has a clean criminal record, was not arrested at the scene, and that the allegation was based on secret information without proper investigation. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order also directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent; if any prior case is found, the bail may be cancelled, otherwise it will be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Whether the petitioner’s claim of a clean antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30(a)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Criminal antecedent
Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Section 482 BNSS

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91924 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2025 Thana- DAWATH District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Shivji Ram S/o Shree Bhagwan Ram Resident of Village- Pathkauli Nonhar,
                 PS- Dawath, District- Rohtas
                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                   ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Meena Singh, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 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 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 45 litres of liquor from a bush near the land of one

                   Mathura Pandey.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and

                   he came to be implicated based on the secret information which is the

                   easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper

                   investigation of the case, when petitioner admittedly is a person with
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91924 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     clean antecedent.

                                  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 Dawath P.S. Case No. 224 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…