Patna High Court
Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Kumar RaiversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that, given the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession, provisional anticipatory bail should be granted subject to verification of antecedents under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Vivek Kumar, feared arrest in a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 680 litres of spirit from a Maruti car, which he did not own and from which nothing was found in his conscious possession. He pleaded that he has a clean antecedent and that the investigation was based solely on secret information without proper inquiry. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, ordered provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. The order is subject to Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and if any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed. If the verification confirms a clean record, the provisional bail will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- seizure of illicit liquor
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27196 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2026 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran
======================================================
Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Kumar Rai S/O Suresh Rai R/O Vill.- Lauwa @
Lauwa Chakiya, P.S.- Taraiya ,Dist.- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 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 Sections 30(a) and
41(1) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 680 litres of spirit from a Maruti car. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not
the owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated
based on secret information which is the easiest way to
implicate someone without holding a proper investigation, when
petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27196 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/2
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 Taraiya P.S. Case No.115/2026, 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
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…