Patna High Court

Sanoj ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

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

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with the conditions imposed.

Summary

The petitioner, Sanoj Chaudhary, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 30 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, the liquor was not found in his possession, and he was unaware that another person, Devraj, would misuse his vehicle. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditioned it on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the provisional bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle and lack of direct possession of liquor justify granting anticipatory bail.
Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the confirmation of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
vehicle ownership
criminal antecedent
Section 30
Section 482
Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28183 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2026 Thana- Vasudeva District- Buxar
                 ======================================================
                 Sanoj Chaudhary S/O Rajendra Chaudhary @ Rajendra Bin R/O Vill.- Athar
                 Bind toli, P.S.- Vasudeva, Dist.- Buxar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Ms.Dimpal Kumari
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Md. Fahimuddin
                 ======================================================
                 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 30 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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.28183 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that Devraj 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.

          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 Vasudeva

          P.S. Case No. 31 of 2026, 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 more

          than 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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28183 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
                                                          3/3




                        anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after

                        verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one

                        case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be

                        confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…