Patna High Court
Raja Kumar MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
A person who is merely the owner of a vehicle from which liquor is seized, without being in possession or having prior criminal antecedent, is entitled to anticipatory bail subject to verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Raja Kumar Mandal, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 after 159 litres of liquor were recovered from a Tata Magic vehicle he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor, asserting that the vehicle was misused by another individual, Rajiv Kumar Das. The State opposed the anticipatory bail application. The Court, noting the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond and two sureties, and directed verification of his criminal record. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail despite the seizure of liquor from his vehicle
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of direct possession and clean antecedent justify granting bail
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are appropriate
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- prohibition act
- excise
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13506 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1132 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Jamui
======================================================
Raja Kumar Mandal Son of Rameshwar Mandal @ Kameshvar Mandal
Resident of Village- Singardih P.S- Rikhiya District- Deoghar, Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dipak Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad, 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar
Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 159 litres of liquor from a Tata Magic vehicle. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13506 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Rajiv Kumar Das would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged, who was 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 Excise
Court-II, Jamui in connection with Jamui Prohibition P.S. Case
No. JAM 1132/24, 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.13506 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
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…