Patna High Court
Amit Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Amit Kumar Singh, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 480 litres of liquor from his Scorpio. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not present at the spot of seizure, and was unaware that his driver misused the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted detention. The Court, considering the petitioner's clean record and the circumstances of the alleged offence, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The order also directed the trial court to verify the petitioner's antecedent and confirm or set aside the bail accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence disqualifies the petitioner from obtaining anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner's alleged clean antecedent influences the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60902 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2025 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Amit Kumar Singh S/O Nawal Kishor Singh R/O Village- Parariya, Post and
PS - Madanpur, District- Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Gaurav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar No. III, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-01-2026 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.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 480 litres of liquor from a Scorpio.
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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60902 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his driver would misuse the vehicle in
the manner as alleged who also fled away from the spot.
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.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
Aurangabad Mufassil P.S. Case No. 179 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60902 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
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…