Patna High Court
Satyendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Satyendra Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of 405.36 litres of liquor from three vehicles he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not present at the spot of seizure, and was unaware that another individual, Raushan Kumar, would misuse his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle linked the petitioner to the offence. The High Court, considering the petitioner's clean record and lack of direct possession of the liquor, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of antecedents under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether mere ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged offence justifies arrest and denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- Section 482(2) inherent powers
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60549 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2025 Thana- AURAI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Satyendra Kumar S/o Late Saheb Sah R/o Village- Dakrama, PS- Hathauri,
District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, 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 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 405.36 litres of liquor from three different vehicles.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60549 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is also
submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Raushan
Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who
was also apprehended from the spot.
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 Exclusive
Special Judge Excise Court No.-II, Muzaffarpur in connection
with Aurai P.S. Case No.108 of 2025, 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.60549 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…