Patna High Court

Ranjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 20 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

Petitioner Ranjeet Kumar, owner of a motorcycle from which 47.88 litres of liquor was seized, sought anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, claiming he had no knowledge of the liquor and was not in possession of it. He argued that the seizure was based solely on his ownership of the vehicle, and that his friend, who fled the scene, was responsible. The State opposed the bail. The Court noted the petitioner’s clean antecedent, lack of direct possession, and the fact that ownership alone does not constitute participation in the offence. Accordingly, the Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and a condition that the trial court verify his antecedent within six weeks. If any prior case is found, the bail will be cancelled; otherwise, it will be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to justify arrest and denial of bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
Section 482(2)
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
seizure of liquor

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24513 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2026 Thana- HASANPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Ranjeet Kumar Son of Firangi Mukhiya Resident of Village - Goh Mauji,
                 Ward No. 5, P.S.- Hasanpur, District - Samastipur.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Raja Ram Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Sharda Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-04-2026                  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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 47.88 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.

                                4. Learned     counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   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.24513 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that

          his friend 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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court

          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 Hasanpur

          P.S. Case No. 06 of 2026 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 antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24513 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                      anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                              (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…