Patna High Court

Govind RayversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Govind Ray, sought anticipatory bail after liquor amounting to 18.360 liters was seized from a motorcycle he owned, though he was not present at the spot and had no conscious possession of the liquor. He argued that he had a clean antecedent and that his friend, who fled, misused the vehicle without his knowledge. The State opposed the bail, contending the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in view of the seizure of liquor from his vehicle.
Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail bond
excise offence
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Section 30
Section 482
Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10754 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2025 Thana- JALALPUR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Govind Ray S/O Raghunandan Rai @ Raghu Nandan Ray R/O Vill.-
                 Semariya, P.S.- Rivilganj, Dist.- Saran at Chapra.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-04-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 18.360 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.

                                4. Learned     counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended 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 next submitted that no prudent person would use

                   his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10754 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is also 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. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       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 Trial Court

          within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

          Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Jalalpur

          P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down

          under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

                       7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          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 would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10754 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                      anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                              (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…