Patna High Court

Rakesh Kumar AzadversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 30 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

Rakesh Kumar Azad, the owner of an e‑rickshaw, was implicated in a case where 50 litres of liquor were recovered from the vehicle, although he was not arrested at the spot and claims he had no knowledge of the alleged misuse. He sought anticipatory bail, asserting a clean criminal antecedent and arguing that ownership of the vehicle should not automatically render him culpable. The State opposed the bail, contending that the alleged offences under Sections 30(a), 41 and 56B of the Bihar Excise Act warranted his detention. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked, but if the petitioner is found to have a clean record, the bail would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in view of the alleged recovery of liquor from his e‑rickshaw.
Whether ownership of the vehicle and lack of immediate arrest justify the grant of anticipatory bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
liquor seizure
clean antecedent
Section 482
Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28849 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Rakesh Kumar Azad S/o Late Nandu Saw Resident of Village- Mother
                 Taresha Marg, House No. 3, Uttari Sri Krishna Puri, P.S.- S.K.Puri, Distt.-
                 Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr.Vijay Kumar Sinha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   30-04-2026               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 Sections 30(a), 41

                   and 56B of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 50 litres of liquor from an e-rickshaw.

                             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 e-

                   rickshaw. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28849 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
                                            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 Mumtaz 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 within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Patna Excise P.S. Case No. 75 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 even 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 anticipatory bail order shall not be
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28849 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
                                                          3/3




                        confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a

                        person with clean antecedent 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…