Patna High Court
Rohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedent, with confirmation contingent on a clean record.
Summary
The petitioner, Rohit Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 37 of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of liquor from an under‑constructed house and a motorcycle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the house, and was unaware that his friend misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The decision was made under the inherent powers of the Court pursuant to Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Excise Act where the accused claims no possession and a clean antecedent
- Whether the High Court can impose conditions and a verification mechanism under Section 482(2) of the BNSS
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- provisional bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66698 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2022 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Rohit Kumar S/o- Lala Mahto Resident of Mohalla- Shiv Mandir Biruachak,
P.S. Mehandiganj, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjit Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 07-01-2026 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) and
37 of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10 liters of liquor from an under constructed house
and 8 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
owner of the under constructed house and he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66698 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
motorcycle. 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 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
Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 161 of 2022 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66698 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…