Patna High Court
Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
Santosh Kumar was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 30.200 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and was unaware that the vehicle was misused by others. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the seized liquor, suffices to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- seizure of liquor
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2) BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14532 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-830 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya
======================================================
Santosh Kumar Son of Amresh Bhuiyan Resident of Village- Itwan
Bharaundha, P.S.- Gurua, Dist.- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
======================================================
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 Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 30.200 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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.14532 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 Ramji would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
who was also apprehended along with Chotu and Satrudhan.
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.
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 Excise
P.S. Case No. 830 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14532 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
3/3
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 anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…