Patna High Court
Rupesh Kumar PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedents and compliance with the conditions of Section 482(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Rupesh Kumar Pandit, sought anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly recovering 0.650 litre of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and was unaware that another individual, Manish Kumar, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the seizure implicated the petitioner. The Court considered the petitioner's clean antecedent, lack of conscious possession, and the principle that ownership of a vehicle does not automatically imply participation in the offence. Relying on Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., the Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond and verification of antecedents. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a vehicle owner not in possession of the alleged contraband
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants provisional bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 482
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12914 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1759 Year-2023 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Rupesh Kumar Pandit S/o Arjun Pandit R/o Village- Old Khagra, PS-
Kishanganj, Distt.- Kishanganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 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 0.650 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12914 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
would create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Manish Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the
manner as alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot
along with Vijay Kumar.
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.1759 of 2023, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12914 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
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…