Patna High Court
Ramlal MistryversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramlal Mistry, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for the alleged recovery of 80 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor, asserting that the actual offender, Kapil Kumar Das, misused his vehicle without his knowledge. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. If the trial court finds a clean antecedent, the provisional order will be confirmed; otherwise, it will not be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged seizure makes the petitioner liable for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31725 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2025 Thana- Bathnaha District- Araria
======================================================
Ramlal Mistry S/o Budhhu Mistry Resident of village- Kursakanta Khaisrail,
P.S.- Kursakanta, District-Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, 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 80 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
and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31725 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Kapil Kumar Das would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
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 Bathnaha P.S. Case
No. 29 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.31725 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.