Patna High Court
Rajnish @ Nisha Ray @ Rajnish Kumar @ NishaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted provisionally, subject to verification of the petitioner’s clean antecedent, despite the vehicle ownership link to the alleged offence.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajnish Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, where liquor was allegedly recovered from a vehicle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware of his friend's misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending the petitioner’s ownership linked him to the offence. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a modest bond and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedents. It further stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed, but if the petitioner is found clean, the bail would be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in a case of alleged possession of liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act?
- Whether ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged offence can alone constitute sufficient grounds to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- seizure of liquor
- Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16480 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2026 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran
======================================================
Rajnish @ Nisha Ray @ Rajnish Kumar @ Nisha S/o- Late Banarasi Ray
R/v- Raipatti Mirpur Bhual Ps- Dighwara Dist- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh No. I
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-04-2026 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 Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 3 litres of liquor from possession of Sunita, 2 litres
of liquor from a bottle from where co-accused were
apprehended and 32 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16480 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and
thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get
implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that his friend would misuse his vehicle in
the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
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 Dighwara P.S. Case No.17/2026, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16480 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
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…