Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of antecedents and compliance with bail conditions.
Summary
Rahul Kumar 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 107.250 litres of liquor were recovered from his vehicle. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was unaware of any misuse of his vehicle by a third party, and that ownership alone should not implicate him. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The court directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10073 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-375 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Jamui
======================================================
Rahul Kumar, S/O Vijay Chauhan R/O Village - Beldariya Kakan, Police
Station - Jamui, District- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dipak Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rana Randhir Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-03-2026 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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 107.250 litres of liquor from a
car.
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 the seized
vehicle. It is also submitted that no prudent person would use his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10073 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
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
Ashish Ranjan would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged as he was also apprehended at 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.5,000/- (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 Jamui Prohibition P. S. Case No.375 of 2025 (Jam P. S.
Case No.375 of 2025), 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.10073 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than 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 has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…