Patna High Court
Abodh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to conditions, with confirmation contingent on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Abodh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 72.6 litres of liquor from an e‑rickshaw he owned. He argued that he was not present at the spot of seizure, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that a person named Rajesh would misuse his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner was implicated by virtue of ownership of the vehicle used in the offence. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, conditioning it on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and requiring the petitioner to surrender within six weeks. The order further directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner without proof of conscious possession.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14349 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-276 Year-2025 Thana- SUPPI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Abodh Kumar S/o Pashpat Raut @ Pasapat Raut R/o 6/11 MN -6 Janam N,
6Va, Parsauni Gop, P.S. - Parsauni, Dist. - Sheohar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Virendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-03-2026 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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 72.6 litres of liquor from e-rickshaw.
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.14349 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Rajesh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged,
who was also apprehended from the spot along with Indrajeet.
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 before the learned trial court within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand) 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 Suppi P.S. Case No.
276 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 more than 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 has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14349 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
3/3
antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…