Patna High Court
Dinesh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bonds and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Rai, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act for the alleged recovery of 40 litres of liquor from two motorcycles, one of which he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and was unaware that another individual misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after hearing counsel, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is found, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence is sufficient grounds for arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise
- Section 30(a)
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59963 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-363 Year-2019 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Dinesh Rai son of Sitab Rai Resident of Village -Mael PS -Bidhupur Distt
-Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 40 litres of liquor from two different motorcycles. 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 one of the seized vehicles. 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59963 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Pankaj Kumar would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot along with Nitish Kumar and Arvind Kumar.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge
Excise, Patna City in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case
No.363 of 2019, subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59963 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…