Patna High Court
Sajjad Ali @ Md. SajjadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedents and compliance with the stipulated bond and sureties.
Summary
Petitioner Sajjad Ali, owner of a vehicle, was implicated in a case involving the seizure of 14 litres of liquor from two motorcycles, although he was not arrested at the spot and no liquor was found in his possession. He claimed a clean antecedent and argued that he was unaware that his vehicle was misused by another person, Govind, who was apprehended. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., while the State opposed the relief. The Court considered the petitioner’s lack of direct involvement, his clean record, and the statutory provisions, and ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and sureties. The order further directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedents and confirm the bail if no prior cases are found, otherwise to cancel it.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in view of the allegations under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence is sufficient grounds for arrest and denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24683 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2025 Thana- SIKTI District- Araria
======================================================
Sajjad Ali @ Md. Sajjad Son of Bhojan Ali Resident of Village- Pipra Bijwar,
P.S.- Palasi, District- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Sections 30(a),
32(2), 41 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,
2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 14 litres of liquor from two motorcycles as detailed
in the FIR. It is next submitted 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 one of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that
no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24683 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and
hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that the
petitioner was completely unaware that Govind would misuse
his vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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 Sikty P.S. Case No.176/2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24683 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…