Patna High Court

Dilip RamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 28 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedent cases.

Summary

The petitioner, Dilip Ram, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a), 41 and 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 67.38 litres of liquor from an e‑rickshaw he owned. He argued that he was not present at the spot, nothing was seized from his possession and he was unaware that his driver misused the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The Court, applying Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties of equal amount, and a six‑week surrender, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. If the verification shows more than two prior cases, the bail will not be confirmed; if exactly two, it will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence makes the petitioner liable despite lack of personal possession of the liquor.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

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

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28093 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Dilip Ram S/o Suresh Ram R/o Village - Puraini, P.S. - Giriyak, Distt. -
                 Nalanda.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms. Sharda Kumari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   28-04-2026                  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), 41

                   and 47 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of two cases, out of which, one case is

                   under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 67.380

                   litres of liquor from an e-rickshaw. It is next submitted 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 an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28093 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated.

          It is also submitted that the petitioner was completely unaware

          that his driver would misuse his vehicle in the manner as alleged

          who also fled from the spot.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          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.10,000/- (Rupees ten 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 (Nawada) Excise P.S. Case No.191/2026,

          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 more than

          two cases, 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
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28093 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two

                       cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                       be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…