Patna High Court
Shashi Bhushan Prasad Sinha@Shashi Bhusan PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was refused as ownership of the seized vehicle does not, by itself, warrant bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Shashi Bhushan Prasad Sinha, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case (P.S. No. 444 of 2020) for alleged contravention of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, wherein 5.250 litres of illicit liquor were recovered from a vehicle he owned. The prosecution argued that the liquor was seized from his vehicle, making him a suspect, while the petitioner contended that no incriminating material was found in his personal possession and he had a clean antecedent. The petitioner’s counsel emphasized the lack of direct involvement and the fact that ownership alone should not suffice for arrest. The State opposed the bail, asserting the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s connection to the seized vehicle. The Court considered the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle and the nature of the offence, concluding that mere ownership does not justify anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court refused the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the owner of a vehicle from which illicit liquor was seized under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- illicit liquor
- vehicle ownership
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28590 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-444 Year-2020 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR District-
Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Shashi Bhushan Prasad Sinha@Shashi Bhusan Prasad S/O Kailash Mahto
R/O Vill.- Lodipur, P.S.- Chhabila Pur, Dist.- Nalanda, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastva, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 30-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Muzaffarpur Sadar
P. S. Case No. 444 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable
under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per prosecution case, 5.250 liters illicit liquor
was recovered from the seized vehicle of which this petitioner is
registered owner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
incriminating material has been recovered from conscious
possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has got no concern with
the alleged recovery and he has been made accused in this case
only on suspicion. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28590 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
2/2
bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the fact that petitioner is owner of the
seized vehicle, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is
refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…