Patna High Court
Budhan RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Budhan Ram, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018-2022 for allegedly recovering 20 litres of liquor from a scooty he owned. He argued that he had a clean criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and was unaware that his friend misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offence was cognizable and the petitioner was liable. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a modest bail bond and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedents before confirming the bail. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances of the alleged offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged seizure makes the petitioner liable under Sections 30(a) and 32(3)
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are satisfied
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018/2022 — s. 30(a), 32(3)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- seizure of liquor
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31882 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-463 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Budhan Ram S/o Late Nanipat Ram R/o village- Harpur Balra, PS- Maniyari,
District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hari Kishore Thakur
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat
======================================================
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 Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018-
2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 20 litres of liquor from a Scooty. It is next
submitted that 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 vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31882 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/3
would create evidence against himself and hence would get
implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that his friend would misuse his vehicle in
the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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 Excise P.S. Case No.463/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31882 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/3
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.