Patna High Court
CR. MISC./57657/2026 of Krishna Tuddu Vs The State of Bihar on 19 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57657 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2026 Thana- JHAJHA District- Jamui ====================================================== Krishna Tuddu, S/o Narayan Tuddu @ Narayan Tudu R/V- Gaurdamgi, P.S.- Jhajha, Dist.- Jamui ... ...
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57657 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2026 Thana- JHAJHA District- Jamui ======================================================
Krishna Tuddu, S/o Narayan Tuddu @ Narayan Tudu R/V- Gaurdamgi, P.S.- Jhajha, Dist.- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr.Pramod Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sucheta Yadav
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
19-08-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 03 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner.
4. The 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 house in question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57657 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that it does not appear probable that Chaukidar would have known who had concealed the liquor in the house.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. 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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum 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 Jhajha P. S. Case No.95 of 2026, subject to 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 petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57657 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his 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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
vikash/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T