Patna High Court

Pramod KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of criminal antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Pramod Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 for the alleged recovery of 58.97 litres of liquor from his auto, although the liquor was not found in his immediate possession. He argued that he had a clean antecedent and was unaware that his vehicle was misused by another individual, Sumit, who was apprehended at the scene. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, considering the submissions, granted a provisional anticipatory bail order, requiring the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and subject to verification of his criminal antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances.
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to attract criminal liability under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are appropriate for provisional anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30(a)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
vehicle ownership
criminal antecedent
Section 482(2)
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7101 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2025 Thana- KASBA District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Pramod Kumar S/O Raj Kumar Yadav Resident of Village- Rajiganj, P.S-
                 Mufassil, District- Purnea.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Bidhu Ranjan
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms. Sangeeta Sharma
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-04-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 58.97 litres of liquor from an auto.                       It is next

                   submitted that 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 create evidence against himself and hence would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7101 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                            2/3




          implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was

          completely unaware that Sumit would misuse his vehicle in the

          manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot

          along with Abhinandan.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender 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 Kasba P.S. Case No.150/2025, subject to the

          conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

          shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one

          case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had

          concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

          provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

          on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7101 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                       shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…