Patna High Court

Md. Minhaj AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 7 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

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

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Minhaj Alam, owner of a scooty from which 4.68 litres of liquor was recovered, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Sections 30(a) and 37 of the Bihar Excise Act. He argued that he had no knowledge of the liquor being in his vehicle and that he was not in possession at the time of seizure, emphasizing his clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under the Bihar Excise Act
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise offence
ownership of vehicle
clean antecedent
provisional bail
section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67015 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-366 Year-2025 Thana- RAJIVNAGAR District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Minhaj Alam S/O Late Md. Taiyab @ Late Taiyab Malik R/o- Flat No.-
                 102, Firoz Palace, Indrapuri, Mirza Galib College, P.S.- Shastrinagar, District-
                 Patna (Owner of Seized vehicle- BR01FL-8610)

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Saket Anand, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Rabindra Kumar, 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, Mr. Rabindra Kumar.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 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 4.68 liters of liquor from a Scooty.

                                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 he came to be

                   implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized

                   Scooty. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67015 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
                                            2/3




          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

          Iqbal would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who

          was also apprehended 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, 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 Rajiv

          Nagar P.S. Case No. 366 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67015 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…