Patna High Court

Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

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

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedents.

Summary

Mukesh Kumar, the owner of a pick‑up vehicle, was implicated in a case (PS Case No‑154/2025) for the alleged recovery of 531 litres of liquor, an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. The petitioner argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware of any misuse of his vehicle by the driver. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, considering the petitioner’s clean record and lack of direct possession, ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., pending verification of antecedents by the trial court. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged liquor seizure.
Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle suffices to constitute participation in the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
liquor seizure
vehicle owner liability
Section 30(a)
clean antecedent
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.741 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2025 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Mukesh Kumar S/O Mangan Sah Resident of Mohalla- House No 1002, Gali
                 No 1, Raja Garden, Jalandhar - 1, P.S. Basti Bawa Khel, District- Jalandhar,
                 Punjab.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Santosh Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Satyendra Prasad
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-01-2026                  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

                   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 531 litres of liquor from a pick-up vehicle. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.741 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                            2/3




          would create evidence against himself and hence would get

          implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was

          completely unaware that his driver would misuse his vehicle in

          the manner as alleged.

                       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 before the learned Court below

          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 Gaighat

          P.S. Case No.154/2025, 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
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.741 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       on verification 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)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…