Patna High Court

Ritik ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 12 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Ritik Chaudhary applied for anticipatory bail after the police alleged that 3 litres of liquor were recovered from his motorcycle in violation of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that another person, Md. Naviv, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties of the same amount, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the order to be confirmed or set aside based on that verification. The bail was conditioned under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances Act.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances.
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence implicates the petitioner.
Whether the lack of conscious possession of the liquor negates the basis for arrest.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13876 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2025 Thana- PIYAR District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Ritik Chaudhary Son of Umesh Chaudhary Resident of Village- Simra, P.S.-
                 Piyar, District- Muzaffarpur
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                  ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Priyesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 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 the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 3 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.13876 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                            2/3




          would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was

          completely unaware that Md. Naviv 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 Piyar P.S. Case No. 192 of 2025, 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

          confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13876 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                     anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…