Patna High Court
Ajay Kumar JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Kumar Jha, was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 1,800 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He was not arrested at the spot and no liquor was found in his personal possession; the prosecution’s case rests on his ownership of the vehicle used by a friend who allegedly misused it and fled. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing he was unaware of the misuse and that a prudent person would not use his own vehicle to commit the offence. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the bail to be confirmed only if he has no more than two prior cases.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the excise offence.
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the seized liquor, suffices to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29844 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2026 Thana- RUNNISAIDPUR EXCISE District-
Sitamarhi
======================================================
Ajay Kumar Jha S/O Vedinath Jha R/O Vill- Near State Boding Ward no.1,
Near Sbji Chowk, Dakshni Panchhayat Manik Chhuk, P.S- Runni Saidpur,
Dist- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Krishna Murari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of two cases out of which one case is
under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1.800 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29844 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
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 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 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. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten 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 Runnisaidpur P.S.
Case No. 26 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 more than two
cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29844 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
antecedent of two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…