Patna High Court
Vishnu Kumar VermaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedents.
Summary
Vishnu Kumar Verma sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for alleged recovery of 1,231.560 litres of liquor from two vehicles he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, the liquor was not found in his immediate possession, and he was unaware that his driver misused the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents by the trial court. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct possession of the seized liquor justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31908 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2021 Thana- DANIYAWAN District- Patna
======================================================
Vishnu Kumar Verma Son of Sri Bhola Mahto Resident of Village-
Maghalyatola, P.S.- Giridih Town and District- Giridih (Jharkhand)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Patel, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, 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 (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 1231.560 litres of liquor from two vehicles.
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 one of the seized vehicles. It is next submitted that no
prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an
occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against himself
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31908 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/3
and, hence, would get implicated. It is also submitted that
petitioner was completely unaware that his driver 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 Daniyawan P.S.
Case No. 121 of 2021, 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
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31908 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/3
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.