Patna High Court
Tinku Rai @ Tinku KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail for the petitioner, subject to a bail bond, sureties, and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Tinku Rai, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 210 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He asserted that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, was not the vehicle's owner, and was falsely implicated by local residents and a watchman. The petitioner, who has a clean antecedent, applied for anticipatory bail, which the State opposed. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in the context of the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of conscious possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the FIR is tainted by false implication by local persons and the watchman.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- FIR
- liquor seizure
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1191 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-414 Year-2025 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Tinku Rai @ Tinku Kumar S/o Raj Kumar Rai Resident of Village- Harpur
South Tola, P.S.- Baniyapur, District- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Dr. Indiwar Kumari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026 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 Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 210 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated at the instance of the local persons and Chawkidar
but then it is submitted that if the local persons and Chawkidar
were aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1191 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
occurrence then why they did not inform the police prior to the
institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that it appears that
the Chawkidar in order to save the real culprits falsely
implicated the petitioner.
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, let 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
Baniyapur P.S. Case No. 414 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1191 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail 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…