Patna High Court
Mukesh Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
Mukesh Kumar Singh was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for the recovery of 889.56 litres of liquor from two vehicles, including 34.56 litres from his motorcycle. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, that he was unaware of his friend’s misuse of the vehicle, and that he has a clean criminal antecedent. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent by the trial court. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. in a case of alleged liquor seizure under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle, without conscious possession of the liquor, is sufficient grounds for denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor seizure
- Section 30(a)
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28910 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2025 Thana- Krishnabraham District- Buxar
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar Singh S/O Shambhu Singh R/O Village- Maniya, P.S.-
Sonvarsha, Distt.- Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Dimpal Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-05-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 889.56 litres of liquor from two vehicles out of
which 34.56 litres of liquor was recovered from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28910 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
2/3
and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence,
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in
the manner as alleged who also fled 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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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 Krishna Brahm P.S.
Case No. 164 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28910 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…