Patna High Court

Kunal AnandversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 23 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Kunal Anand, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 99 litres of liquor from his Maruti car. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, that the vehicle was misused by a third party named Sumit, and that he had a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted 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 antecedents within six weeks. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; if his record remains clean, the bail will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Excise Act offences.
Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and ownership of the vehicle justify bail.
Whether the trial court should verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
liquor seizure
vehicle ownership
criminal antecedent
Section 482
Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27402 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
                                                    District- Kishanganj
                 ======================================================
                 Kunal Anand Son of Kulanand Pandit Resident of Village - Purani Bazar, P.S.
                 and District - Madhepura.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1
                 ======================================================
                 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and

                   32(3) 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 99 liters of liquor from a Maruti car.

                                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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27402 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
                                            2/3




          his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that Sumit would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged

          who was also apprehended 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 Special

          Case No. 143 of 2020 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27402 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…