Patna High Court
Raju Kumar Dev Saw @ Raju Kumar @ Raju SawversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Raju Kumar Dev Saw, was implicated in a case for alleged recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned, under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. He claimed a clean antecedent and argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, as the vehicle was misused by a friend who fled the scene. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If a prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if he is found to have a clean record, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order is subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31662 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2023 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada
======================================================
Raju Kumar Dev Saw @ Raju Kumar @ Raju Saw S/o Dev Saw Resident of -
Sunflower EMB Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 9, Udhyog Nagar, Waliv Phata, P.S - Vasai,
District - Thane, State - Maharashtra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vivek Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-05-2026 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, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 60 litres of liquor 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.31662 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
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 Rajauli P.S. Case
No. 33 of 2023, 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.31662 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.