Lalbabu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 02-07-2026

¶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 317(5), 111 and 61(2) of the BNS as well as Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 6912 litres of liquor from a truck and five different vehicles were seized.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that petitioner is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and came to be implicated based on the confessional statement of

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43382 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026 2/3

¶17

Rajesh Kumar in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law. It is next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation of the case.

¶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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender 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 Sonpur P.S. Case No. 186 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

¶20

However, 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 more than three cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43382 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026 3/3

¶22

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 has antecedent of only three cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

¶23

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶24

Kundan/-

¶25

U T

Lalbabu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalbabu 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

Vikash Kumar @ Bhoma @ Vikash Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vinod Sahu @ Binod Sahu Vs The State of Bihar

Nitesh Manjhi @ Nitesh Kumar @ Nitish Manjhi @ Nitish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bhola Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Chhotu Mahto @ Chathu Mahto @ Chhotu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar