Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Gobardhan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was refused as the petitioner, being the registered owner of the seized motorcycle, could not be granted bail under the circumstances.

Summary

Gobardhan Kumar, a government teacher, applied for anticipatory bail after a motorcycle registered in his name was seized with 24 litres of illicit liquor, leading to a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The prosecution alleged the liquor was recovered from the vehicle, which the petitioner had sold in 2019 to Dilip Paswan, but the registration was not updated due to the buyer’s negligence. The petitioner argued that no incriminating material was found in his possession, he had no involvement in the seizure, and he has a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing that the petitioner remains the registered owner of the seized motorcycle. The Court considered the ownership link and the seriousness of the offence and consequently refused the anticipatory bail. The petition for bail was dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a registered owner of a vehicle from which illicit liquor was seized, despite lack of personal possession of the contraband.

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • illicit liquor
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • vehicle ownership
  • Section 30(a)
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28648 of 2026
                           Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2020 Thana- NTPC District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Gobardhan Kumar S/O Sidhu Prasad Village - Chintamanchak, PS- Pandarak,
                 District - Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Suraj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, 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 NTPC P. S. Case

                   No. 7 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. As per prosecution case, 24 liters illicit liquor was

                   recovered from the seized motorcycle 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. As a matter of fact, petitioner is a

                   government teacher posted in Dhanbad, Jharkhand and has got

                   no concern with the alleged recovery. Petitioner had sold the

                   motorcycle in question in the year 2019 to co-accused Dilip

                   Paswan and requisite form for transfer of ownership of the
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28648 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
                                                          2/2




                        motorcycle was dully filled and notarized but the name of owner

                        on Registration Certificate was not updated due to negligence

                        on part of the new owner. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

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

                        bail of the petitioner.

                                     6. Considering the fact that petitioner is registered

                        owner of the seized motorcycle, prayer for anticipatory bail of

                        the petitioner is refused.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.