Patna High Court
Ashish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
Ashish Kumar was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for the alleged recovery of 6.75 litres of liquor from an Indio car. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession. The petitioner argued that the vehicle from which the liquor was seized had been sold to the opposite party, Suraj Kumar, who in turn had sold it to another person, thereby showing lack of direct involvement. The State opposed the petition for anticipatory bail. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500, two sureties of the same amount, and a condition that the trial court verify the petitioner’s antecedent. If any criminal antecedent is discovered, the provisional bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged ownership and subsequent sale of the vehicle implicates him in the offence.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- provisional bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57180 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2023 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda
======================================================
Ashish Kumar S/o- Nagendra Prasad R/o Village- Deepnagar PS - Deepnagar
Dist- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Suraj Kumar Suraj Kumar S/o Nawal Kishore Tianti R/o Mo. Mogal Kuan
P.O/P.S. - Sohsara Dist. - Nalanda
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 13-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
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, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 6.750 litres of liquor from an Indio Car.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57180 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
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 implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner prior to
the occurrence had already sold the vehicle to the opposite party
no. 2.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the said submission of the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the
vehicle was sold to him but it is submitted that prior to the date
of occurrence, the opposite party no. 2 had also sold the vehicle
to Ravi Kumar.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage,
submits that this amply demonstrates that how the police in a
mechanical manner implicated the innocent person without
holding a proper investigation of the case, when petitioner
admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
8. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57180 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
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 Giriyak
P.S. Case No. 55 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
9. 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 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
Checking your session…