Patna High Court
Ajit Kumar @ Ajeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Ajit Kumar and Vijay Kumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after learning that they might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging the recovery of 72 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and a scooty. They contended that they have clean antecedents, that no liquor was found in their conscious possession, and that the second petitioner was implicated merely as the owner of the scooty, unaware of its misuse by a friend. The prosecution relied on a confessional statement of an arrested accomplice, which the petitioners argued lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, but the High Court, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bail bond, two sureties, and verification of antecedents. The order further required the petitioners to deposit Rs.1,500 each with the Advocates’ Association and stipulated that the bail could be revoked if any prior case is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 when the accused claim no possession of the contraband.
- Whether a confessional statement of an arrested co‑accused can form the basis for denying anticipatory bail.
- Whether ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged offence, without knowledge of its misuse, suffices to justify arrest.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- confessional statement
- Section 482
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4154 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- NADI District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Ajit Kumar @ Ajeet Kumar Son of Vijay Kumar Yadav @ VIjay Yadav
Resident of Village - Sarojabela, Navakatol, Ward No. 06, P.S.- Supaul,
District- Supaul.
2. Vijay Kumar Yadav @ Vijay Yadav Son of Siya Ram Yadav @ Siyaram
Yadav Resident of Village - Sarojabela, Navakatol, Ward No. 06, P.S.-
Supaul, District- Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No 13, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 72 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and a Scooty. It
is next submitted that petitioners were not arrested from the
spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious
possession and petitioner no.2 came to be implicated based on
the fact that he is owner of the seized Scooty. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4154 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
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 implicated. It is also
submitted that petitioner no.2 was completely unaware that his
friend Jitendra Yadav would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot along with
Arun Sada and the name of petitioner no.1 transpired based on
confessional statement of apprehended accused in police
custody, which does not have any evidentiary value, since
petitioner no.1 is son of petitioner no.2.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
P.O., Exclusive Special Excise Court-I, Supaul in connection
with Supaul Nadi P.S. Case No.133 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4154 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioners shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event, if it is
found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed their 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 petitioners are persons with clean antecedent, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners,
based on instruction, submits that petitioners undertake to
deposit an amount of Rs.1500/- each with Advocates’
Association, Patna High Court within a period of two weeks
from today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…