Patna High Court

Arman KhanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner's antecedent.

Summary

Arman Khan applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 30(a), 32(3) and 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 0.7 litres of liquor from a car he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not present at the spot of seizure, and was unaware that another person, Sishir Kesarawani, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the petitioner furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and subject to verification of his antecedent by the trial court. If any prior case is found, the bail may be cancelled; otherwise, it will be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a vehicle owner not in possession of the seized liquor.
Whether the allegations under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act warrant denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
vehicle ownership
liquor seizure
clean antecedent
Section 438
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15541 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-327 Year-2023 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
                 ======================================================
                 Arman Khan S/o Jabbar Khan R/o House no. 789, Vidhansabha Road Masjid
                 ke Pass, P.S.- Sardhoo, Distt.- Raipur, State- Chhatisgrah
                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                          ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-03-2026                  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),

                   32(3) and 37 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 0.7 litres of liquor from a car.

                                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 further submitted that no

                   prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an

                   occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15541 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
                                            2/3




          hence would get implicated. It is next submitted that petitioner

          was completely unaware that Sishir Kesarawani would misuse

          the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended

          from the spot along with two other named accused persons.

                       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 Kishanganj Excise P.S. Case No. 327 of

          2023, 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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15541 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a

                     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…