Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 150 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, that he was merely the vehicle owner, and that a friend who misused the vehicle fled the scene. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bail bond and two sureties, directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the bail will be confirmed immediately. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the seized liquor, suffices to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- Section 30
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34837 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2026 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/O Vijay Prasad Yadav @ Vijay Prasad Resident of Village-
Vishunpur, P.S.- Govindpur, Dist.- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nitish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-06-2026 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) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 150 liters of liquor from a
motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34837 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
his friend 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 before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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
Govindpur P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026 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 more than 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.34837 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
antecedent of one case only, in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.