Patna High Court
PRAMOD CHAUDHARYversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Pramod Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 150 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he did not own. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession and that he was unaware of his friend's misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order further stipulated that if more than one antecedent case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of ownership and possession of the vehicle and liquor negates the grounds for denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent warrants denial or confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- motor vehicle
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25549 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-184 Year-2025 Thana- Gurupa District- Gaya
======================================================
PRAMOD CHAUDHARY S/O SHIVCHARAN CHAUDHARY R/O Village-
Niyazipur, P.S.- Chandauti, District- Gaya Ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-04-2026 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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 150 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
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
not the owner 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.25549 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
2/3
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 Gurpa P.S. Case
No. 184 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
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25549 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
3/3
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…