Patna High Court
Ravindra Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions, and the provisional order will stand unless verification reveals more than one prior case against the petitioner.
Summary
Ravindra Kumar Singh, the owner of a vehicle from which 179.98 litres of liquor were recovered, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. He argued that he was not present at the spot of seizure, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that his driver misused the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, citing the offence under Section 30(A) of the Excise Act and the petitioner’s prior case under the same Act. The Court noted that ownership of the vehicle does not automatically imply participation in the offence and that the petitioner’s lack of knowledge could justify bail. It granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a vehicle owner not in possession of contraband under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(A)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Excise Act
- vehicle owner liability
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16113 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2025 Thana- NUAOW District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Ravindra Kumar Singh Son of Shayam Bihari Singh Resident of Village -
Bishunpur, P.S. - Barhari, Dist. - Rohtas at Sasaram.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajani Kant Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Pushpa Sinha.1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(A) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 179.98 litres of liquor from a
car.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16113 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
his driver would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
who also fled from the spot.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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 Nuaon P. S. Case No.53 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16113 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…