Patna High Court
Surya Chaudhary @ Surja ChowdhuryversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Surya Chaudhary, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 0.18 litre of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that others would misuse his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle linked him to the offence. The High Court, considering the petitioner's clean record and the circumstances, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and a verification of his antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the CrPC in a case arising under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether mere ownership of the vehicle from which liquor was recovered makes the owner liable for the offence.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 32(3)
- Section 482(2)
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- excise offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12056 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-262 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Surya Chaudhary @ Surja Chowdhury S/o Sahadeb Chowdhury R/o Village -
Gennabari, P.S - Islampur, District - Uttar Dinajpur (W.B)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of
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 0.18 litre of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next
submitted 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 next submitted that no prudent person would
use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus,
would create evidence against himself and hence, would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12056 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Md. Torab and Naim Akhtar would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged, who were also apprehended
from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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-bond in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special
Judge Excise-II, Kishanganj in connection with Madya Nisedh
P.S. Case No.262 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioner 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 obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12056 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…