Patna High Court
Guddu Ram @ Suddu RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
Guddu Ram, a resident of Patna district, was implicated in an alleged excise offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the recovery of 40 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He was not caught in possession of the liquor and claims he was unaware that another individual, Kundan, misused his vehicle. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing his clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and a six‑week period for surrender, and conditioned confirmation of the bail on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to justify arrest.
- What conditions may be imposed on provisional anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- ownership of vehicle
- Section 30 Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482 CrPC
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39453 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2026 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna
======================================================
Guddu Ram @ Suddu Ram S/o Ramji Mochi Resident of Village- Bindaul,
P.O. and P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna, State- Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhigyan Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-06-2026 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 40 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
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
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39453 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Kundan would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who
was 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 Rani
Talabs P.S. Case No. 32 of 2026 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.39453 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
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.