Patna High Court
Taher AlamversusThe 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 antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Taher Alam, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act, alleging that only 500 ml of liquor was recovered from his motorcycle and that he had no prior criminal record. He argued that he was not in possession of the contraband at the time of seizure and that the vehicle’s owner should not be presumed guilty for the alleged misuse by another person. The State opposed the bail, contending that the seizure implicated the petitioner. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in a case under the Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the seized vehicle and alleged involvement constitute sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of a clean antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(3)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- bail bond
- clean antecedent
- motorcycle seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19227 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-611 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Taher Alam S/o- Ahmad Ali R/v- Haldibari P.O- Taiyabpur Ps- Pothia
District- Kishanganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Ranjan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Akbar Ali
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 500 ml from a motorcycle.
4. The 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
motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19227 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Kuldeep would misuse the vehicle in the manner
as alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with
Panchanand Singh.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Madya Nisedh P. S. Case No.611 of 2024, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19227 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.