Patna High Court

Nurul HaqueversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 1 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Nurul Haque, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 38.5 litres of liquor recovered from a scooty he owned. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in actual possession of the liquor, and that his friend, who fled the scene, had misused the vehicle. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that ownership of the vehicle alone should not create criminal liability. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s antecedent within six weeks; if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed. Upon verification of a clean antecedent, the provisional bail would be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused is merely the owner of a vehicle from which liquor was recovered, without actual possession.
Whether a clean antecedent is a prerequisite for granting anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Whether the court may impose a condition of antecedent verification before confirming anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Section 482(2)
BNSS

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21076 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2025 Thana- KUDHNI District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Nurul Haque S/o Jamruddin Resident of Village - Mohammadpur
                 Maruahan,P.S - Bariyarpur, District - Muzaffarpur

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Dr. Bipin Chandra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Gulnar Begum, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   01-04-2026                  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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 38.5 liters of liquor from a Scooty.

                                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

                   his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21076 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as

          alleged who also fled 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.

          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 Kudhani

          P.S. Case No. 118 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 even one case

          then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21076 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                      anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                              (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…