Patna High Court

Raju RamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 8 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedent cases.

Summary

The petitioner, Raju Ram, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in an excise case for alleged recovery of 9 litres of liquor from a motorcycle 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 his friend misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 (Amendment) 2022. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. It directed that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the excise case under Sections 30(a), 32(i), 32(iii), 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 (Amendment) 2022.
Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle and lack of conscious possession of the liquor justify granting bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise offence
vehicle ownership
possession
criminal antecedent
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22211 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-698 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
                 ======================================================
                 Raju Ram Son of Rupchand Ram Resident of Village- Kilani, P.S.- Chand,
                 District- Kaimur at Bhabua

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Sonu Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                  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 Sections 30(a),

                   32(i), 32(iii), 41(i) (ii) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act,

                   2018 (Amendment) 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 9 litres of liquor from a motorlcycle.

                   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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22211 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                            2/3




          thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get

          implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was

          completely unaware that his friend Raju would misuse his

          vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended

          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.10,000/- (Rupees ten 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 P.S. Case No.698/2025, 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 more than

          two cases, 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
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22211 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two

                       cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                       be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…