Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe 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 cases and compliance with the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018, involving alleged recovery of 2,682.9 litres of liquor from three vehicles. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was unaware of his driver’s misuse of his vehicle, and that ownership of the vehicle alone should not implicate him. The State opposed the bail. The Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only two, it will be confirmed. The order thus provides conditional relief pending trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) CrPC in the context of alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged liquor seizure, without personal possession of the liquor, suffices for arrest.
- What conditions should be imposed on the anticipatory bail, particularly concerning the verification of prior criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72431 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- VAINI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Nitish Kumar Son of Hari Pd. Singh @ Suhari Pd. Singh R/o Vill.- Bazitpur,
Police Station - Karpurigram @ Karpoorigram, District - Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, 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, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 2682.900 litres of liquor from three
different vehicles.
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.72431 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and
hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner
was completely unaware that his driver would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who also fled away 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, 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.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 Vaini P.S.
Case No. 67 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
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72431 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…