Patna High Court
Shyam Sundar VermaversusThe 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 criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Shyam Sundar Verma, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for the alleged recovery of 159.84 litres of liquor from a Tata Magic vehicle he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that another individual, Dilip Kumar, misused his vehicle. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents by the trial court. If the trial court finds a clean antecedent, the bail will be confirmed; otherwise, it may be revoked.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner without proof of possession or knowledge.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23372 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2024 Thana- SRIPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Shyam Sundar Verma S/O Shish Ram Resident of village- Phulpur, P.S.-
Babhnan, District- Gonda, Uttar pradesh
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pritish Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 159.84 litres of liquor from a Tata Magic.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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 create evidence against himself and, hence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23372 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Dilip Kumar would misuse the vehicle
in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended 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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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 Sripur P.S. Case
No. 216 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23372 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…