Patna High Court
Krishna KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions, as the petitioner’s alleged involvement is tenuous and he has a clean antecedent.
Summary
Krishna Kumar, the owner of a scooty, feared arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 8.640 litres of liquor recovered from the vehicle. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and that the vehicle was misused by a friend who fled the scene. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court examined whether the mere ownership of the vehicle and the alleged recovery of liquor justified denial of bail, and considered the relevance of the petitioner’s antecedent. It granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond, sureties, and a condition that the trial court verify his antecedent before confirming the order. The Court also allowed a correction of a typographical error in the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. to a person alleged to be involved in an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle from which liquor was recovered, without proof of actual possession, is sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent influences the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- liquor possession
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29860 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-568 Year-2025 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR District-
Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Krishna Kumar S/o Ram Naresh Mishra R/o Village - Jataulia, P.S. - Baruraj,
District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar S.K., Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 8.640 litres of liquor from a Scooty.
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.29860 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
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 Muzaffarpur Sadar
P.S. Case No. 568 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.29860 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
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.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
seeks permission to make rectification in para 1 and in the
prayer portion of the anticipatory bail application as it is
submitted that at both the places Sadra P.S. Case No. 568 of
2025 has been typed when it ought to have been Sadar P.S. Case
No. 568 of 2025.
9. Permission is accorded.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…