Patna High Court
Rajdev MehtaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedents.
Summary
Petitioner Rajdev Mehta was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly transporting 33.3 litres of liquor in a motorcycle he owned, though the liquor was not found in his immediate possession. He argued that he had a clean antecedent and was unaware that a friend misused his vehicle, and therefore should not be arrested. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, considering the petitioner's clean record and the circumstances, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedents by the trial court. The order further stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the liquor, justifies anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. can be applied to grant provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Smuggling Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13613 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- NADI District- Supaul
======================================================
Rajdev Mehta S/O Ashok Kumar Bhusakuliya Resident of Village- Birpur,
Ward No. 02, P.O.- Basantpur, P.S- Birpur, District- Supaul, State- Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kuldeep Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 33.3 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.13613 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
implicated. It is thus submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that his friend would misuse his vehicle in
the manner as alleged, who also fled 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 Supaul Nadi (Riverine) P.S. Case No.33/2024,
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13613 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…