Patna High Court
Avdhesh RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Avdhesh Ray, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with alleged offences under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act involving the recovery of 1080 litres of liquor from a vehicle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that his vehicle would be misused. The State opposed the bail. The High 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 criminal antecedent. The court stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the provisional bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) CrPC in view of the alleged excise offences.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner.
- What conditions should be imposed on 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
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22193 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-910 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Avdhesh Ray S/o Anandi Ray R/o Vill- Tajpur Rajo @ Bhorhan, P.S.- Mahua,
Distt- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anish Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 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 1080 litres of liquor from a pick-up vehicle.
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
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22193 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Anish Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
as he was also apprehended at the spot.
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
Excise P. S. Case No.910 of 2025, 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
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22193 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
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…