Patna High Court
Dharemandra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Dharemandra Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 36 litres of liquor recovered from a scooty he owned. He argued that he was not in possession at the time, that the vehicle was misused by a friend who fled, and that ownership alone should not create liability. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order is subject to the provisions of Section 482(2) of the BNSS and the trial court’s further verification.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to establish participation.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2)
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12118 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-325 Year-2025 Thana- HATHUA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Dharemandra Kumar S/o- Jai Kishun Sah R/v- Turkpatti., P.S.- Hathua,
District-Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghav Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 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 has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 36 liters of liquor from a Scooty.
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.12118 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is further 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.
5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Hathua
P.S. Case No. 325 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 more than 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 has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12118 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
antecedent of one case only, in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.