Patna High Court
Ramu PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with bail conditions.
Summary
Ramu Prasad, the owner of a bus from which 552.960 litres of liquor were seized, applied for anticipatory bail under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act, claiming he had no knowledge of the liquor and possessed a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the seizure implicated the petitioner. The court examined the petitioner's claim that he was not in possession of the liquor and that ownership of the vehicle alone should not constitute guilt. It noted that the petitioner must surrender within six weeks and provide bail bonds and sureties. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner's antecedent and compliance with the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. If a prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the owner of a vehicle from which liquor is seized can be granted anticipatory bail under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct possession justify anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7044 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1635 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Ramu Prasad Son of Vipat Prasad Resident of - Ward No. 2, Gagol, Partapur,
P.S.- Meerut, District -Meerut(Uttar Pradesh) at present residing at -House
No. 292 Gali No. 5, Bagh Karen Khan, Kishanganj, Malkaganj, P.S. - Roop
Nagar, District - New Delhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, 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 Sections 30(a) and
32(3) 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 552.960 liters of liquor from a bus.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7044 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated
and at the same time shall bring disrepute to his business, it is
also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that some
passenger had concealed the liquor in the bus, but then the
police in mechanical manner investigates and implicates.
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 Sitamarhi
Excise P.S. Case No. 1635 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7044 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
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…