Patna High Court
Baiju Kumar @ Baiju ChaurasiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner's antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Baiju Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2012 for allegedly possessing 345.6 litres of liquor in a Bolero pick‑up. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in actual possession at the time of seizure, and was unaware that another person, Lal Mohan, misused his vehicle. The State opposed his anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. given the alleged possession of liquor.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence implicates the petitioner without proof of actual possession.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail bond
- Cr.P.C. 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11625 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2025 Thana- SUKHANI District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Baiju Kumar @ Baiju Chaurasiya Son of Mahavir Chaurasiya R/o Village -
Bhandarisome, P.S. - Manigachi and Dist. - Darbhanga (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2012.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 345.6 litres of liquor from a Bolero Pick-Up.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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 create evidence against himself and, hence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11625 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Lal Mohan would misuse the vehicle
in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended 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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender 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 Special Case No.
280 of 2025 arising out of Sukhani P.S. Case No. 56 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11625 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
3/3
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…