Patna High Court
Vishal KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The application for anticipatory bail is allowed, subject to provisional bail bonds and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 30(a), 30(b) and 30(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for allegedly recovering 280 litres of liquor from a river bank. They contended that no liquor was found in their possession, the alleged recovery site did not belong to them, and the informant’s name was omitted from the FIR, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the excise offences. The High Court, invoking Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the filing of bail bonds of Rs 15,000 with two sureties each and a six‑week window for surrender. The order further directed the trial court to verify the petitioners’ criminal antecedents and stipulated that the bail would be confirmed only if the antecedent thresholds (clean record for petitioner 1, at most three cases for petitioner 2, and at most one case for petitioner 3) were met; otherwise the bail would be withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether the alleged facts and lack of possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the trial court should verify the petitioners’ criminal antecedents before confirming bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 30(b), 30(c)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 30
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9924 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1245 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Vishal Kumar S/o Brij Kishore Rai R/o Village - Hemantpur, P.S - Garkha,
District - Saran at Chapra
2. Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Rai S/o Badan Rai R/o Village - Baburbani, P.S -
Sonepur, District - Saran at Chapra
3. Ankit Kumar S/o Mohan Lal Ray @ Satendra Rai @ Lal Mohan Ray R/o
Village - Baburbani, P.S - Sonepur, District - Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a), 30(b)
and 30(c) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 is a person with clean antecedent, petitioner no.2
has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and petitioner
no.3 has antecedent of one cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 280 litres of liquor from bank of a
river. It is next submitted that petitioners were not arrested from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9924 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious
possession and even alleged recovery is from a place which
does not belong to the petitioners but then is accessible to
villagers at large and they came to be implicated at the instance
of local villager but then name of the villager who disclosed the
name of the petitioners is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted
that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise,
the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance
of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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 from today, are 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 learned 2nd Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Saran at Chapra
in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No.1245 of 2025, subject
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9924 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. 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 has antecedent of even one
case, petitioner no.2 has antecedents of more than three cases
and petitioner no.3 has antecedents of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their antecedents
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 no.1 is a person with
clean antecedent, petitioner no.2 has antecedents of only three
cases and petitioner no.3 has antecedent of only one case, in that
event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…