Patna High Court
Sanjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjeet Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018/22 for the alleged recovery of 82.125 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, that the liquor was not found in his immediate possession, and that he was unaware of his friend’s alleged misuse of the vehicle. 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 of the same amount, invoking Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order conditioned confirmation of bail on the trial court’s verification of the petitioner’s antecedents, with bail to be denied if any prior case is found and confirmed if he is found to have a clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence implicates the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018/22
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants confirmation of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018-22 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36957 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2025 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
Sanjeet Kumar S/O Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Yadav Resident of Village-
Masaundha, P.O.- Bhalua, P.S- Mohanpur, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018/22.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 82.125 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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.36957 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
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 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 Mohanpur P.S.
Case No. 180 of 2025, 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.36957 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
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.