Patna High Court
Mohit RajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Mohit Raj, sought anticipatory bail in a case under Sections 30(a) and 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that he was falsely implicated because the liquor was recovered from a passenger in his vehicle and no material was found in his physical possession. The prosecution argued that the accused were caught with liquor and were in a drunken state. The petitioner contended that he was not named in the FIR, no independent witness corroborated the charge, and the seizure memo lacked proper signatures, casting doubt on its legality. The court noted the absence of on‑spot apprehension, lack of possession, clean antecedent, and procedural defects in the seizure. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond, sureties, cooperation with investigation, and verification of criminal antecedent. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case
- Whether the seizure and search memo are valid and sufficient to justify denial of bail
- Whether the provisions of Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 are applicable
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- seizure validity
- vehicle owner liability
- prohibition law
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16908 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2026 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya
======================================================
Mohit Raj Son of Ravindra Kumar Gupta Resident of Mohalla- K.P. Lane,
Kabir Bagh, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (amendment) Act, 2022.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that upon seeing
the police party, two persons boarded on a car, tried to flee
away, but the police party nabbed them. On query they disclosed
their names as Rahul Anand and Saurabh Kumar Keshri.
Thereafter it is alleged that on search one bottle of 375 ml of
Royal Challenger liquor was recovered from the waist of Rahul
Anand and both the accused persons were found in drunken
state.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16908 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case on the basis of suspicion and nothing has been
recovered from his conscious physical possession. He is not
named in the FIR and during the course of investigation, no any
independent witness supported the prosecution case
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering that the petitioner was not
apprehended on the spot and, therefore, nothing was recovered
from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner and
that he has been implicated simply because he happens to be the
owner of the vehicle and further taking into account that the
search and seizure memo is also not signed by two independent
witnesses, which puts a question mark on the legality and
validity of the seizure itself, and taking notice the fact that the
petitioner has clean antecedent, I am inclined to grant privilege
of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, as named above, in the event of
his arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be
enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16908 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
Court No.1, Gaya in connection with Bodhgaya P.S.Case No. 51
of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and subject to further
condition that :-
(i) the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation/
trial.
(ii) the learned Court would, however, verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case it is found that
the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the Court
below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, it is expected that the verification process
would be done expeditiously without causing any delay.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
HR/-
U T
Checking your session…