Patna High Court
Devchan Kumar Mehta @ Devchand Kumar MehtaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Devchan Kumar Mehta, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, where 76.5 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from three motorcycles, one of which he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware of his friend's alleged misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC to a person alleged to be involved in an offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged offence implicates the owner for bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10017 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2024 Thana- BALUA BAZAR District- Supaul
======================================================
Devchan Kumar Mehta @ Devchand Kumar Mehta Son of Dasrath Mehta
R/o Village - Arraha, P.S. - Pratapganj Now Karjain, Dist. - Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Naresh Kumar Mehta
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umanath Mishra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 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 76.5 litres of liquor from three different
motorcycles.
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 he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of one of the
seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10017 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner
as alleged who also fled from the spot.
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
Balua Bazar P. S. Case No.47 of 2024, 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
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10017 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
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.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…