Patna High Court
Rakesh Ray @ Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Ray, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, where liquor was allegedly recovered from a motorcycle he owned and a house. He argued that the liquor was not found in his immediate possession and that he was unaware of his friend's alleged misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending the petitioner’s involvement. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., pending verification of his criminal antecedent. The order stipulates that if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in the context of alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle from which liquor was recovered is sufficient grounds for arrest and denial of bail.
- Effect of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent on the confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- excise offence
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23708 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-284 Year-2025 Thana- BOCHAHAN District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Rakesh Ray @ Rakesh Kumar S/o Dubari Lal Ray Resident of Mohalla-
Jaganiya, PS - Benibad, Dist-Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Shaheen Begum, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 23-04-2026 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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 23.76 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle and 72.9 litres of liquor from the house of Kalu @
Vikram Kumar.
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 further submitted that no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23708 of 2026(3) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an
occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against himself
and, hence, would get implicated. It is also 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. 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.5,000/- (Rupees
Five 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 Bochaha P.S. Case
No. 284 of 2025, 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 more than one
case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23708 of 2026(3) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…