Patna High Court
Md. Sahid AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bonds and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Sahid Alam, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act for allegedly recovering 500 ml of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor, asserting that ownership of the vehicle alone should not create liability. The State opposed the bail, contending that the alleged offence warranted custody. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent by the trial court. The order further stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the provisional bail would be revoked, whereas a clean record would lead to confirmation of the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC for alleged offences under the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions should be imposed on the provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(3)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- motor vehicle
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16114 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Md. Sahid Alam S/o Md. Yunush R/o Village - Barudiha, P.S - Chakuliya,
District - Uttar Dinazpur (W.B)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Ranjan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal
======================================================
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
Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 500ml of liquor from a motorcycle.
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
motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16114 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Bakhtiyar Aalam would misuse the vehicle in the
manner as alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along
with Md. Farman.
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.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
Madya Nisedh P. S. Case No.71 of 2026, 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 even one case, then it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16114 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…