Patna High Court
Raju BhaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the stipulated bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Raju Bhai, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 74.4 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, had no liquor in his possession, and was unaware that a person named Chhotu misused his vehicle. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the provisional bail will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence makes the owner liable for anticipatory bail denial
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS are appropriate
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- Section 30
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent verification
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28212 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2025 Thana- ITARHI District- Buxar
======================================================
Raju Bhai S/o- Sharif Khan @ Sarif R/v- SArayasharif Budhanpur Ps-
Nandganj Dist- Ghazipur, U.P
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arun Kumar Gupta
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Iftekhar Mahmood
======================================================
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 under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 74.4 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28212 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
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 Chhotu 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 Itarhi P.S.
Case No. 151 of 2025, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28212 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
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
Checking your session…