Patna High Court
Jitendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitendra Kumar, owner of a vehicle from which 153 litres of liquor was seized, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, that the vehicle’s ownership alone should not make him culpable, and that he was unaware of any misuse by a co‑occupant. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The order directs the trial court to confirm the bail if only one prior case is found, otherwise the bail will not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case of alleged possession of liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle from which liquor was seized makes the owner liable.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(3)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40655 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1561 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar Son of Dewan Yadav @ Dwarika Mahto Resident of Village -
Nagwan Mandir, Road, PS- Ichak District- Hazaribagh
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisu Zzoha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-06-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 153 litres of liquor from a Bolero vehicle. It is next
submitted 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 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 would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40655 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that Sakaldev would misuse his vehicle in
the manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) 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 Excise Gaya P.S. Case No.1561/2025, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40655 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.