Patna High Court

Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 6 May 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

Mukesh Kumar was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly possessing 7.5 litres of liquor recovered from his scooter. He was not arrested at the spot, and the prosecution’s case rested on his ownership of the vehicle, which his younger brother allegedly misused. The petitioner, a first‑time offender, sought anticipatory bail, arguing lack of conscious possession and clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, after which the bail would be confirmed or set aside.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Whether ownership of the vehicle, without proof of conscious possession of liquor, suffices to deny bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30
liquor possession
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30056 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2020 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Mukesh Kumar S/o Parmanand Ray R/o Village - Terasiya (Terahrasia), PS -
                 Ganga Bridge, District - Vaishali
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                  ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Raj Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, Spl.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-05-2026                  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 Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 7.5 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

                   and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30056 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
                                            2/3




          would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was

          completely unaware that his younger brother, namely, Rakesh

          Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who

          was also apprehended from the spot along with Rajiv Rai.

                       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 Alamganj P.S. Case

          No. 63 of 2020, 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.30056 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
                                                       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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…