Patna High Court – Orders
Satish Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 9 March, 2026
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12665 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2026 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Satish Kumar S/O Mahendra Rai Resident of Village- Litiyahi Rajasan,
Police Station- Rustampur, Dist.- Vaishali.
2. Nirala Kumar @ Nirala Rai S/O Dilip Baba @ Dilip Ray @ Dilli Baba R/o
Vill.- Diwantok (Ashpatpur Singhia) Urf Lathiahi Raisan, P.S.- Ganga
Bridge, Dist.- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Sweety Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Akshay Lal Pandit
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-03-2026
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 274 and 275 of the B.N.S. and Section 30(A) of the
Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of eight cases out of which
seven cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner no.2 is a
person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of
2181.57 litres of liquor from a hut.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12665 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
2/3
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a hut, which does not belong to the petitioners
and they came to be implicated based on confessional statement
of apprehended accused in police custody, which does not have
any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that police in
majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at the
behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and
confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding
a proper investigation. It is reiterated and submitted that
petitioner no.2 is a person with clean antecedent.
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. 40,000/- (Rupees Forty 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 Bidupur P. S. Case No.19 of 2026, subject to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12665 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
3/3
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
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 has antecedent of more than
eight cases and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of even one case,
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 no.1 has antecedent of
eight cases only and petitioner no.2 is a person with clean
antecedent, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T