Allowed¶19

Rahul kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Apr 2026CR. MISC./22972/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail; provisional anticipatory bail; Patna High Court; Criminal Miscellaneous No. 22972 of 2026; Justice Satyavrat Verma; Sections 272, 273, 420, 467, 468, 120(B) IPC; Sections 30(a), 32, 36, 41(i) Bihar Excise Act; Section 482(2) BNSS; 1845 litres liquor recovery; Rajepur P.S. Case No. 172 of 2022; East Champaran; criminal antecedent verification; deemed possession; 2018 Excise Act amendment; confessional statement of co-accused Ranjit.

What did the court decide?

Provisional anticipatory bail upon arrest or surrender within six weeks, on bail bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) BNSS; confirmation subject to verification of criminal antecedents by the Trial Court. ¶19

Rahul kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in Rajepur P.S. Case No. 172 of 2022 for offences punishable under Sections 272, 273, 420, 467, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 30(a), 32, 36 and 41(i) of the Bihar Excise Act, is entitled to anticipatory bail.

¶13

Court's answer

In the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court within a period of six weeks, the petitioner is to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner; if it is found that the petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, it would be presumed that he concealed his antecedents before this Court for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, and the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed.

¶20

Key takeaways

If verification shows that the petitioner has antecedent of one case only, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail (Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 22972 of 2026, decided 17-04-2026, Satyavrat Verma, J): Petitioner apprehending arrest in Rajepur P.S. Case No. 172 of 2022 (East Champaran) for offences under Sections 272, 273, 420, 467, 468 and 120(B) IPC read with Sections 30(a), 32, 36 and 41(i) of the Bihar Excise Act. Allegation of recovery of 1,845 litres of liquor from a truck, pick up vehicle and a motorcycle; petitioner not apprehended from the spot, nothing recovered from his conscious possession, not owner of the seized vehicles, and implicated on the confessional statement of co-accused Ranjit in police custody. Petitioner disclosed antecedent of one Excise Act case. Granted provisional anticipatory bail: to be released on arrest or surrender within six weeks on bail bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties of like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) BNSS. Trial Court to verify antecedents: if more than one case found, provisional bail not confirmed (concealment presumed); if one case only, confirmed forthwith.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22972 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2022 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Rahul kumar son of Late Bhushan Ray Resident of village -semraha, PsRajepur, Dist- East Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 17-04-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273, 420, 467, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 30(a), 32, 36 and 41(i) of the Bihar Excise Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1845 liters of liquor from a truck, pick up vehicle and a motorcycle.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and came to be implicated

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22972 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026 2/3

¶17

based on confessional statement of Ranjit in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that after amendment in the excise act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with.

¶18

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶19

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 Trial Court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five 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 Rajepur P.S. Case No. 172 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

¶20

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22972 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026 3/3

¶22

confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

¶23

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶24

Rishabh/-

¶25

U T

Rahul kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Asraful Vs The State of Bihar

Om Prakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shivandra Kumar Ray @ Shivam Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Muslim @ Mohd. Muslim Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Yuvraj Kumar @ Bunty Kumar Vs The State of Bihar