Patna High Court
Birendra Kumar MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Birendra Kumar Mishra, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging recovery of 20.25 litres of liquor from two vehicles, one of which he owned. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was unaware of the misuse of his vehicle by a co‑accused, and that ownership alone should not implicate him. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. If the verification shows more than one prior case, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.499 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2022 Thana- JOKIHAT District- Araria
======================================================
Birendra Kumar Mishra S/O Late Suresh Mishra R/O Vill.- Kali Bazar, Ward
No. 13, P.S. - Araria, Dist.- Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 20.25 litres of liquor from two different vehicles.
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 it next submitted that no
prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an
occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.499 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner
was completely unaware that Rahul would misuse the vehicle in
the manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot
along with other named accused persons.
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 for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Jokihat
(Mahalgaon) P.S. Case No. 260 of 2022, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
7. 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 more than one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.499 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…