Patna High Court
Manish KumarversusThe 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
Manish Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of 40 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. The petitioner argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was unaware of any misuse of his vehicle, and that ownership alone should not implicate him. The State opposed the bail, contending potential risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
- Whether ownership of the seized vehicle implicates the petitioner in the alleged offence
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- vehicle seizure
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25615 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2026 Thana- DANIYAWAN District- Patna
======================================================
Manish Kumar S/o Vinod Singh Resident of Village- Khusrupur Kohawan,
P.S.- Daniyawan, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Ankita Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umesh Lal Verma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-04-2026 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
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case 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
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25615 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
2/3
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Vikash would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged as he
was also apprehended at the spot along with Ravi Ranjan.
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.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 Daniyawan P. S. Case No.01 of 2026, 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 more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25615 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
3/3
obtaining 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 has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…