Patna High Court
Sheikh TaslimversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sheikh Taslim, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for the alleged recovery of 3.705 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor, asserting that his friend Navik Kumar misused the vehicle. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioned it on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If the petitioner is found to have a clean antecedent, the bail will be confirmed; otherwise, it may be revoked. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- The applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. when the accused is not in possession of the contraband but is the owner of the vehicle.
- Whether a clean antecedent is a prerequisite for granting anticipatory bail in offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- The relevance of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in the grant of provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- prohibition and excise
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13530 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2022 Thana- SIKTI District- Araria
======================================================
Sheikh Taslim S/o Sheikh Yusuf R/o- Rampara, Ward No. 23, P.S.- Katihar,
Distt.- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, A.P.P
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
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 3.705 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13530 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his friend Navik Kumar would misuse
the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
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, let the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Sikti P.S. Case No. 324 of 2022, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13530 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…