Patna High Court

Ritesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 26 February 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Ritesh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 20 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession and that he was unaware his friend, who was driving the vehicle, would misuse it. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If the petitioner is found to have more than two prior cases, the bail would not be confirmed; if he has two or fewer, the bail would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and ownership of the vehicle justify bail.
Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
seizure of liquor
vehicle ownership
criminal antecedent
Section 30(a) Bihar Excise Act
Section 482 CrPC

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12143 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2025 Thana- BUDHUCHAK District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Ritesh Kumar S/o Sitaram Mandal R/o Village- Barohiya, Thana-
                 Buddhuchak, District- Bhagalpur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Nityanand, 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 two cases out of which one case is

                   under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 20 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12143 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
                                            2/3




          his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

          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.

          10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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

          Budhuchak P.S. Case No. 95 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 two

          cases 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12143 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has

                      antecedent of two cases only, 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…