Patna High Court
Dharmendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted under Section 438 CrPC notwithstanding the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle, provided he furnishes bail bonds and his antecedent is verified to be clean.
Summary
Dharmendra Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under the Excise Act alleging that 55 litres of liquor were recovered from his motorcycle. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that the vehicle would be misused. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent. The court stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for offences punishable under the Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether a clean criminal antecedent is a condition for confirming anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32, 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- bail bond
- clean antecedent
- motor vehicle
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37467 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-195 Year-2022 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Dharmendra Kumar S/o Yogendra Sah Resident of village - Hariyan Chhapra,
ward no. 8, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a), 32 and 41(1) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 55 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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
motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37467 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Mukesh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with Ram
Vinay Sahani.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Muffasil P. S. Case No.195 of 2022, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37467 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.