Patna High Court
Gore Lal MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, holding that mere ownership of the vehicle without conscious possession or prior criminal antecedent does not preclude bail.
Summary
Gore Lal Mandal was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 for the alleged recovery of 27 litres of liquor from a car he owned. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, was not arrested at the spot, and was unaware that the driver, Saurav Kumar, misused his vehicle. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court noted the petitioner’s clean antecedent, the lack of direct possession, and the principle that mere ownership of a vehicle does not automatically create culpability. Accordingly, the Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal record. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 — s. 30(a), 41
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail
- possession
- vehicle ownership
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34944 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2026 Thana- RATWARA District- Madhepura
======================================================
Gore Lal Mandal Son of Lucho Mandal Resident of Village- Bari Fatoria
Ward No. 04, P.S.- Ratwara, District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Pooja Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 27 litres of liquor from a car.
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 the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent
person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence
and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34944 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Saurav Kumar would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot along with Vidyanand Kumar, Sanoj Kumar and
Vikram Kumar.
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 Ratwara P.S. Case
No. 14 of 2026, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34944 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
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.