Patna High Court

Robin Singhla @ Robin SinglaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Robin Singhla, the owner of a vehicle from which 3,051 litres of liquor were seized, feared arrest in a case under Sections 30(a), 32(ii) and 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Excise Act. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and that his driver, who fled the scene, had misused the 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 and two sureties, pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be cancelled, whereas a clean record would lead to confirmation of the bail.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under the Bihar Excise Act
Whether the ownership of the vehicle, absent possession of the seized liquor, suffices to justify denial of bail

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
liquor seizure
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Section 482
criminal procedure

Judgment

                     TIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33992 of 2024
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-472 Year-2023 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Robin Singhla @ Robin Singla son of Harikimat Rai Singla @ Harikimat Rai
                 House no. 497,Street no. 5, Ranjit Park, P. S. - Ludhiana, District - Ludhiana

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms.Kumari Sujata Sinha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   19-03-2026               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 offences punishable under Section 30(a),

                   32(ii), 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 3051 litres of liquor from a truck.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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 would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33992 of 2024(4) dt.19-03-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated

          and at the same time shall bring disrepute to his business, it is

          further 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 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 Sherghati (Dhobi) P.S. Case No. 472 of 2023,

          subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of

          the BNSS.

                   7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case

          then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33992 of 2024(4) dt.19-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a

                        person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…