Patna High Court
Vikash Nat @ Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that, given the absence of constructive possession and the petitioner’s clean antecedent, anticipatory bail should be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Vikash Nat, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS No.106/2022) for alleged contravention of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018, involving the recovery of four litres of illicit liquor from a tempo that he did not own. He argued that he was not named in the FIR, had no constructive possession of the liquor, and was merely the driver unaware of the contents, and he has a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail. The Court examined the facts, noted that the alleged recovery was from a vehicle not belonging to the petitioner and that he had no prior record, and consequently granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, and specific conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The bail order required the petitioner to appear before the trial court and prohibited tampering with evidence or committing further offences. The order was pronounced by Justice Ajit Kumar.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in view of the alleged recovery of illicit liquor from a vehicle not owned by him.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of constructive possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illicit liquor
- constructive possession
- clean antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33799 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2022 Thana- NATWAR District- Rohtas
======================================================
Vikash Nat @ Vikash Kumar S/O Vijay Nat @ Vijay Prasad R/O Village-
Khaira Bhudhar or Khaira Budhar, P.S- Bikramganj, Distt.- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Babu Nandan Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bishweshwar Ram, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 20-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Natwar P.S. Case No. 106 of 2022 registered
on14.07.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a),
of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.
3. As per the prosecution case, there has been
recovery of 04 litres of illicit liquor allegedly from a Tempo
bearing Registration No. BR26 PA 5382.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not named in FIR and no recovery has been made
from his constructive possession rather it was made from the
tempo which does not belong to the petitioner. He has falsely
been implicated in this case by the owner of the said Tempo and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33799 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
2/3
he being the driver of the same was not aware as to what was
kept in the Tempo. It has further been stated in the petition that
the petitioner has got no antecedent.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submission of the parties and the
fact that the alleged recovery has not been made from the
constructive possession of the petitioner rather it has been
recovered from tempo which does not belong to the petitioner
and the petitioner has got clean antecedent, let the above named
petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six
weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise
Judge-II, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with aforesaid PS
Case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS as well as the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors should be the
family member/relative/known of the
petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document/ personal affidavit to show his/her
bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33799 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
3/3
on each and every date before the Trial
Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason
will entail cancellation of his/her/their bail
bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no
way try to induce or promise or threat the
witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to
take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist
from committing any criminal offence again,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to
take steps for cancellation of their bail
bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
shikha/rajan
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.