Patna High Court
Anshu Raj @ Ansu RajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions, pending verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Anshu Raj, was implicated in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 500 ml of liquor from a vehicle he owned. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession and that his friend, who was arrested at the scene, had misused the vehicle without his knowledge. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court considered the petitioner’s clean antecedent, lack of direct possession, and the principle that ownership alone does not constitute participation in the offence. It granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal record before confirming the bail. If any antecedent is discovered, the provisional bail will not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Sections 30(a), 32(3) and 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence creates a presumption of guilt.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Settlement Scheme (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail bond
- surety
- excise offence
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22298 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-485 Year-2023 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Anshu Raj @ Ansu Raj S/o- Yogendra Bhagat Resident of Village- Ward No
02 near Harijan School PS- Bihariganj, Dist- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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(3) and 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 500 ml of liquor from a car.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
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.22298 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
his friend Pankaj would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged who was also apprehended from the spot along with
three co-accused persons.
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 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 Kishanganj Excise P.S. Case No. 485 of 2023
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22298 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
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 clean antecedent, in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.