Patna High Court
Rajeev Ranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajeev Ranjan Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for alleged recovery of 23.25 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He contended that he had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that his vehicle was being misused by another person. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bail bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case of alleged possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle from which liquor was seized is sufficient ground for arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent is a condition for confirming anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail bond
- surety
- liquor seizure
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13603 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2025 Thana- HATHIDAH District- Patna
======================================================
Rajeev Ranjan Kumar Son of Sri Anil Kumar Resident of Village- Pandarak,
Ward No. 10, P.S.- Pandarak, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Manglam
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 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
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 23.25 litres 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
would create evidence against himself and hence would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13603 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
implicated. It is thus submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that Abhay would misuse his vehicle in the
manner as alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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 Hathidah P.S. Case No.33/2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13603 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.