Patna High Court

Birendra ThakurversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 17 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Birendra Thakur, owner of a vehicle from which 360 litres of liquor was seized, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act and Sections 272, 273 and 34 of the IPC. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not present at the spot of seizure, and was unaware of his driver’s alleged misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case of alleged liquor seizure and related IPC offences
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement justify granting bail

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
IPC
Section 30
liquor seizure
vehicle owner
criminal antecedent
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16141 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2021 Thana- KALUAHI District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Birendra Thakur Son of Late Yadubir Thakur Resident of Village - Raje, P.S.-
                 Manigachhi, District - Darbhanga.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-03-2026                          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 the

                   Bihar Excise Act and Sections 272, 273 and 34 of IPC.

                                   3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 360 liters of liquor from an Indica 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 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 creating an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16141 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated.

          It is also 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. 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 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 Kaluahi P.S. Case No. 49 of 2021 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

          anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16141 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     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)
Gaurav Sinha/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…