Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ashok KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

Ashok Kumar, the petitioner, feared arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 30 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that the vehicle was misused by another individual. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
  • Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Bihar Excise Act
  • Section 30(a)
  • vehicle ownership
  • clean antecedent
  • Section 482
  • provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13647 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2025 Thana- PANDARAK District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Ashok Kumar Son of Shri Shyamadhar Mahto Resident of village - Daudpur
                 Dinapur-cum-Khagaul, P.S.- Khagaul, 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 :       Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari
                 ======================================================
                 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 30 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13647 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that Sunil 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, 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 Pandarak P.S. Case No. 45 of 2025, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                   7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          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

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a

          person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13647 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.