Patna High Court
Munshi RishiyashanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Munshi Rishiyashan, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 200 litres of liquor from a vehicle he owned. He argued that he was not present at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that the driver would misuse his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted arrest. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent within six weeks. The order stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the provisional bail would be confirmed. The decision was made under the inherent powers of the High Court per Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence creates sufficient grounds for arrest.
- How the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2) BNSS
- high court inherent powers
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.778 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-705 Year-2025 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
======================================================
Munshi Rishiyashan S/O Ramsahay Rishiyashan R/O Village- Salaiya Khurd,
P.S.- Fatehpur, Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Kumar Veerendra Narayan
======================================================
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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 200 litres of liquor from an auto.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.778 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Guddu would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged,
who was also apprehended 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, 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.
5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Muffasil
P.S. Case No. 705 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 more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.778 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…