Patna High Court
Vikash SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
Vikash Sharma, the owner of a truck from which 4,276.8 litres of liquor was seized, was charged under Sections 30(a), 41 and 56 of the Bihar Excise Act. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in actual possession of the liquor, and was unaware that the consignee would misuse his vehicle. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that ownership alone should not make him liable. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and a six‑week window for surrender, and ordered verification of his criminal antecedent before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used for transporting liquor makes the owner liable under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether a clean antecedent is a condition for granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41, 56
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- seizure of liquor
- ownership liability
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37911 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2024 Thana- SAHPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Vikash Sharma Son of Shri Radheshyam Sharma @ Ragheshyam Sharma
Resident of Vilalge- Sinodiya, P.S.- Fulera Tehsil, Sambhar Lek District-
Jaypur Gramin (Rajsthan).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamal Kishore Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 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), 41
and 56 of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 4276.8 liters of liquor from a truck.
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 truck.
It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37911 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would 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
consignee would misuse the vehicle in connivance with Sunil
and Gopal who were also apprehended 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.
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 Shahpur
P.S. Case No. 71 of 2024 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37911 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.