Patna High Court
Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Santosh Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for allegedly recovering 60 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that his vehicle would be misused. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle implicated him in the offence. The Court considered the submissions and applied Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., directing that provisional bail be granted on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and verification of his antecedent. It ordered that if any prior case is found, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was allowed subject to the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to a person accused under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions should be imposed on the provisional anticipatory bail pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- motor vehicle
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27580 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2024 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Saran
======================================================
Santosh Kumar S/O Jagdish Mahto @ Jagdish Singh R/V Parmanandpur, P.S-
Sonepur, Dist-Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeet Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Suman Kumari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-04-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 60 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
motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27580 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Ankit would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with Raj
Karan.
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.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
Nayagaon P. S. Case No.248 of 2024, 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 even one case, then it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27580 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of 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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…