Patna High Court
Rishikesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Rishikesh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 110.7 litres of liquor from a vehicle he owned. He argued that he was not present at the spot of seizure, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that another person, Aman, would misuse his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if the petitioner is found to have more than three prior cases, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle, without conscious possession of the seized liquor, suffices for arrest.
- Effect of the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent on the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(3)
- Bihar Negotiable/Criminal Procedure (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17969 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-194 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE KATORIYA District- Banka
======================================================
Rishikesh Kumar Son of Ashok Singh Resident of Village - Matihani, P.S.-
Matihani, District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dipak Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
110.700 liters of liquor from a car.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17969 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Aman would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
who was also apprehended 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 before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
15000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) 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 Excise
Katoriya P.S. Case No. 194 of 2025 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 more
than three cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for
the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17969 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of three
cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.