Patna High Court
Sushil RawatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Sushil Rawat, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 14.70 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in actual possession of the liquor, and was unaware that the vehicle would be misused. The State opposed the bail, arguing that ownership of the vehicle implicated him. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail‑bond of Rs 500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedents. The order further provided that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn, otherwise it would be confirmed. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in the context of an alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether mere ownership of the seized motorcycle implicates the petitioner in the alleged liquor recovery offence.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- bail bond
- clean antecedent
- ownership of vehicle
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23538 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-888 Year-2025 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran
======================================================
Sushil Rawat S/o Deonath Rawat R/o Village- Mirjapur, P.S- Baniyapur, Dist-
Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwary
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 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
Section 30(a) 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 14.70 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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
motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23538 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Kundan would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with
Dharmendra Kumar.
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
Garkha P. S. Case No.888 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23538 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
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…