Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, surety, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Sections 30(a) and 47 of the Excise Act, where 40 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from his motorcycle. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not present at the time of seizure, and was unaware that his friend misused the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the vehicle’s ownership linked the petitioner to the offence. Justice Satyavrat Verma considered the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the lack of conscious possession, directing provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond and surety conditions. The order also stipulated verification of antecedents by the trial court, with confirmation of bail if no prior cases are found, otherwise the bail would be withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case of alleged possession of illicit liquor.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence constitutes sufficient grounds to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 47
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- clean antecedent
- motor vehicle ownership
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23676 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-469 Year-2025 Thana- SIRDALA District- Nawada
======================================================
Nitish Kumar S/o Jagroop Prasad Yadav @ Jagrup Prasad Yadav R/o Vill.-
Dhab, P.S - Rajauli, District - Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pankaj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
======================================================
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
Sections 30(a) and 47 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 40 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.23676 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 his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner
as alleged who also fled from 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
Sirdalla P. S. Case No.469 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.23676 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.