Patna High Court

BIPIN KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 6 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Bipin Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of liquor from a mini‑truck, a car and a motorcycle seized from a poultry farm. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, that the seized items were not in his conscious possession, and that he was implicated merely because he owned the car used by a friend. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a bail bond and two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be cancelled, otherwise it would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged offence implicates the owner for anticipatory bail purposes.
Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS are appropriate for provisional anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Section 482(2)
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62747 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-469 Year-2025 Thana- MANER District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 BIPIN KUMAR S/o Vijay Singh R/o Village- Paltu Chhatni, P.S.- Naubatpur,
                 District- Patna

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1
                 ======================================================
                 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 2289 of liquor from a mini truck along with one car

                   and one motorcycle which were seized from the poultry farm of

                   Dharam Raj.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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 the seized car. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62747 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
                                            2/3




          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

          further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that

          his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged.

                   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, 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 Maner

          P.S. Case No. 469 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid

          down under Section 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 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

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62747 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…