Patna High Court
Sanjay ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2016, for alleged recovery of 10 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not the owner of the seized vehicle, and that the seizure was based on secret information rather than possession. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. If any antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The order emphasizes verification of antecedents before final confirmation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in the case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2016.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of ownership of the seized vehicle justify granting bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are appropriate for provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail bond
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14757 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2025 Thana- Gurupa District- Gaya
======================================================
Sanjay Chaudhary Son of Basudev Chaudhary Resident of Village- Parsatari,
P.S.- Chauparan, District- Hazaribagh (Jhakhand)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vishwa Ranjan Choudhary
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10 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 is not
the owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated
based on secret information which is the easiest way to
implicate someone, when petitioner admittedly is a person with
clean antecedent.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14757 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
2/2
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 Gurpa P.S. Case No.180/2025, 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
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.