Patna High Court
Nitesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court ordered provisional anticipatory bail for the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitesh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, for allegedly transporting 54 litres of liquor in his motorcycle. He argued that he had a clean record, was not in possession of the liquor, and was unaware that another person, Ramlal, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties of the same amount, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed immediately. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used for alleged contravention suffices to attract criminal liability
- Whether the court may condition anticipatory bail on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45426 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2026 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Nitesh Kumar S/O Ramdular Mandal R/O Village- Matiyar Khurd, P.S.-
Sahiyara, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 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 Section 30(a) of
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 54 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. 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.45426 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/3
implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that Ramlal would misuse his vehicle in the
manner as alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot
along with Gautam.
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.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 Majorganj P.S. Case No.29/2026, 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 even 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 is a person with clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45426 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
3/3
antecedent, 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.