Patna High Court
Arun Kumar @ Arun Yadav @ NetajiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as ownership of the seized truck established sufficient nexus to the alleged offences.
Summary
The petitioner, Arun Kumar, the owner of a truck, was implicated in a case (PS Case No. 142 of 2026) for alleged offences under Sections 281 and 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after the truck's driver tested positive for alcohol (124.2 mg/100 ml). The petitioner argued that no incriminating material was found in his possession and that he had no direct involvement in the incident, seeking anticipatory bail. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle implicated him in the offences. The Court examined whether ownership alone suffices to justify anticipatory bail and considered the seriousness of the alleged offences. Concluding that the petitioner’s connection to the alleged crime was sufficient, the Court refused the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the owner of a vehicle can be granted anticipatory bail when the driver is found intoxicated and the vehicle is seized under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 105, 281
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 37
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- vehicle owner liability
- alcohol consumption offence
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43087 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2026 Thana- GAYA KOTWALI District- Gaya
======================================================
Arun Kumar @ Arun Yadav @ Netaji S/o Raja Yadav @ Rajo Yadav @ Raj
Kumar Yadav Resident of Village- Bara, P.S. -Muffasil, District- Gayajee
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akhilesh Kr Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 01-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Kotwali P. S. Case
No. 142 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 281, 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section
37 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per prosecution case, the driver of truck bearing
registration no. BR02W3956 was apprehended by police and
upon taking his breath analyzer test, consumption of
124.2mg/100 ml alcohol was confirmed. Petitioner is owner of
the aforesaid seized truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
incriminating material has been recovered from conscious
possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has got no concern with
the alleged incident and he has been made accused in this case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43087 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
2/2
merely because he is owner of the seized truck. Petitioner
claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is
refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.