Patna High Court
Murari kumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Murari Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after a police case (PS No.69/2025) alleged that 386.76 litres of liquor were recovered from his Tata Sumo vehicle, implicating him under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. He argued that he was not present at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that a friend misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner surrender within six weeks, furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only two, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner.
- Effect of the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent on the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 482
- Bihar High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7012 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2025 Thana- MAHESHKHUNT District- Khagaria
======================================================
Murari kumar S/o Parmanand Singh R/o Village - Bharwar, P.S - Mufassil,
District - Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 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
petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of
recovery of 386.76 liters of liquor from a Tata Sumo vehicle.
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
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.7012 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
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
who also fled 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.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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
Maheshkhunt P.S. Case No. 69 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 two
cases 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
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7012 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
antecedent of two cases only, in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…