Patna High Court
MohitversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted conditionally, pending verification of the petitioner’s clean antecedent and compliance with the statutory requirements of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Mohit, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for the alleged recovery of 3067.56 litres of liquor from a truck and three vehicles, one of which he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor, asserting that the vehicle was misused by others. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.500 bail bond with two sureties and subject to verification of his criminal antecedent under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail may be cancelled; otherwise, it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. in a case involving alleged possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72422 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-460 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Mohit Son of Balraj Singh R/o Village - Nasirpur Cholka, P.O. - Khanda, P.S.
- Kharkhoda, Dist. - Sonipat (Haryana).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 3067.56 litres of liquor from a truck and three
different vehicles as recorded in the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that he is
owner of one of the seized vehicles. It is next submitted that no
prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72422 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and
hence would get implicated and at the same time shall bring
disrepute to his business when petitioner admittedly is a person
with clean antecedent. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Jitendra Kumar would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged in connivance with Upendra
Kumar, Pankaj Kumar, Prahalad Kumar, Harendra Rai and Bittu
Kumar who were also arrested from the place of occurrence.
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, let 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 Sonepur
P.S. Case No. 460 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72422 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…