Patna High Court
Rakesh ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 10 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was not arrested on the spot, and was unaware that a friend had misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle could implicate him. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, directing the trial court to verify his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances alleged.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged excise offence makes the owner liable.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- ownership of vehicle
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69809 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2025 Thana- GOH District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Rakesh Chaudhary S/o Shiv Chaudhary R/o Village- Koilwan, P.S.- Haspura,
District- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Mukul Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar
======================================================
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) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 10 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69809 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
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.
5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Goh P.S.
Case No. 257 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 more
than 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69809 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…