Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Prem Sagar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle and the seriousness of the offence warranted denial.

Summary

Prem Sagar Chaudhary, the registered owner of a motorcycle, was implicated in a case where 5.22 litres of foreign illegal liquor were recovered from a bag on the vehicle. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming innocence, lack of knowledge about the liquor, and that the bike was lent to a friend. The State opposed the bail, citing the FIR and a report by a police informant linking the vehicle to the offence. The court examined the facts, including the petitioner’s admission of ownership and the seriousness of the offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. Considering the gravity of the charge and the petitioner’s alleged involvement, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner who is the registered owner of the vehicle from which illegal liquor was recovered

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • illegal liquor
  • prohibition act
  • motor vehicle ownership
  • Section 30(a)
  • Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10140 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2025 Thana- SAHPUR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Prem Sagar Chaudhary, aged about 27 years, Male, Son of Vakil Chaudhary,
                 Resident of Village- Tikapur, Police Station- Bahoranpur, District- Bhojpur
                 Bihar.
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP
              ======================================================
             CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
                                    ORAL ORDER

2   17-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Shahpur P.S. Case No. 204 of 2025 instituted for the

                   offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition

                   and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

                                3. As per allegation in the FIR, total 5.22 liters of

                   foreign illegal liquor has been recovered in a bag from a

                   motorcycle bearing Registration No. BR-03AL-4894 and the

                   petitioner is the registered owner of the said motorcycle.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this

                   case only on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that

                   petitioner is a registered owner of the said motorcycle bearing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10140 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
                                            2/3




          Registration No. BR-03AL-4894. He further submits that

          petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in FIR,

          rather his name has been transpired in the instant case only

          because he is the registered owner of the said motorcycle. He

          next submits that the petitioner was not apprehended from the

          place of occurrence and nothing has been recovered from the

          conscious possession of the petitioner. He lastly submits that the

          petitioner gave the motorcycle to his friend namely Dharmendra

          Yadav and he has no knowledge that his friend misuse the

          vehicle. He again submits that neither the petitioner has any

          connection with the alleged seized liquor nor he has involved in

          the business of the illicit liquor. Petitioner has got one criminal

          antecedent of the same nature.

                       5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       6. From perusal of the FIR and also perused the

          impugned order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the learned

          Exclusive Special Excise Court No.2nd, Bhojpur at Ara, it

          appears that on the basis of written report of the informant,

          namely Surendra Manjhi, Sub-Inspector of Police, FIR has been

          registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and

          Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 against two accused persons. It
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10140 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      also appears that one person carrying a bag and riding on a

                      motorcycle bearing Registration No. BR-03AL-4894 in which

                      recovery of 5.22 liters foreign illegal liquor has been found and

                      the motorcycle belongs to the present petitioner, who is the

                      registered owner and the recovery is total 29 bottles contains

                      180 ml each, which is 5.22 liters and the petitioner also admitted

                      that the vehicle belongs to him, so considering the aforesaid

                      facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned

                      counsel for the petitioner as well as gravity of offence and the

                      involvement of the petitioner in the alleged commission of

                      offence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the

                      petitioner.

                                    7. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail of

                      the petitioner stands rejected.


                                                                 (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

Anand Kr.

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.