Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Vikram RajversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Vikram Raj, was implicated in a case involving the seizure of 1,030 litres of liquor from seven motorcycles, alleged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. He contended that he was not in possession of the liquor, had a clean criminal record, and was only linked to the case because he owned one of the seized vehicles, which was misused by a friend. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court considered the petitioner's lack of direct involvement, his clean antecedent, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. It granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a modest bail bond, two sureties, and a condition that the trial court verify his antecedent; the bail would be confirmed if he is found clean, otherwise it would be revoked. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic and Smuggling (B.N.S.S.) Act.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
  • Whether the petitioner’s ownership of a seized vehicle, without actual possession of the liquor, suffices to deny anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • clean antecedent
  • vehicle ownership
  • liquor seizure
  • Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42815 of 2026
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2025 Thana- Gurupa District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Vikram Raj S/o Rajesh Das R/o Vill- Dema Fatehpur, P.S.- Khizersarai, Distt-
                 Gayaji
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mrs. Sanjana, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Nityanand, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-07-2026                   1. Heard Mrs. Sanjana, 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 Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 1030 litres of liquor from seven motorcycles.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted

                   that petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42815 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
                                            2/3




          occurrence and, 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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.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 Gurupa P.S. Case

          No. 151 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under

          Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned

          Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner

          and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,

          it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his

          antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail

          application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42815 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
                                                       3/3




                     shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that

                     petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.