Patna High Court
Sanjay KumarversusThe state of bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 200 litres of liquor from two motorcycles. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and was only the owner of one of the seized vehicles, unaware of its misuse by a friend. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order would be confirmed. The order was made under the inherent powers of the Court under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence, without possession of the contraband, suffices to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38866 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-464 Year-2022 Thana- KOILWAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar S/O Ishwar Dayal R/O Vill.- Kelhanpur, Bindaul,P.S -
Bihta,Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The state of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Saumya
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-06-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 200 liters of liquor from two different motorcycles.
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 one of the
seized vehicles. It is next submitted that no prudent person
would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38866 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
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.
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 Koilwar
P.S. Case No. 464 of 2022 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38866 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
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.