Patna High Court
Sunil Kumar MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Ownership of the vehicle and lack of conscious possession, together with a single prior case, do not bar the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., subject to verification of antecedents.
Summary
Sunil Kumar Mukhiya applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 12 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was merely the owner of the vehicle, unaware of his nephew's alleged misuse. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle implicated him. The Court noted that ownership alone does not constitute participation and, given only one prior Excise case, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedents. The order further stipulated that if more than one antecedent is found, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. despite being the owner of the vehicle from which liquor was recovered.
- 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 ownership
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27952 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2026 Thana- BIRAUL District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Sunil Kumar Mukhiya S/o Ram Prakash Mukhiya Resident of Village -
Barahampur, Police Station - Kusheshwar Asthan, District - Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nilendu Kumar Choudhary
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmanand Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2026 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 under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 12 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27952 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
his nephew Kamlesh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot.
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 Biraul P. S. Case No.98 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27952 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
it 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 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…