Patna High Court
Vickey KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Vickey Kumar, sought anticipatory bail anticipating arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 120 litres of liquor from his scooty. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and he was unaware that a friend misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail application. The court, applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the furnishing of bail bonds and sureties, and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. It further held that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence implicates the petitioner
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants bail
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42101 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-933 Year-2019 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Vickey Kumar S/o Mr. Raju Prasad Gupta R/o Thana More Danapur Cantt,
Pin 801503, P.S.- Danapur Thana, Distt.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Akash Ranjan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 120 litres of liquor from a scooty.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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
scooty. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his
own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42101 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further 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. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Alamganj P. S. Case No.933 of 2019, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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 obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42101 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed his 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
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.