Patna High Court
Rajnish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court ordered provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents, and stipulated that confirmation of bail depends on the outcome of that verification.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajnish Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, for the alleged recovery of 80 litres of liquor from his Alto car. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and that the vehicle was misused by his driver who fled the scene. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if none is found, the bail will be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under the inherent powers of the court as per Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession and alleged misuse of his vehicle by a driver justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- high court inherent powers
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17495 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2019 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
Rajnish Kumar S/o- Tirath Prasad Yadav Resident of Village- Naya Tola PS-
Bakhtiyarpur Dist-Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Tiwari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 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, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 80 litres of liquor from an Alto car. 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 would
use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17495 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
would create evidence against himself and hence would get
implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that his driver 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 Nadi P.S. Case No.137/2019, 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
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17495 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…