Patna High Court
Ravi KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, surrender within six weeks, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent record.
Summary
The petitioner, Ravi Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for the alleged recovery of 315 litres of liquor from two vehicles he owned. He was not arrested at the scene and claimed he was unaware that his driver had misused the vehicle. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that ownership of the vehicle alone should not constitute evidence of his participation. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and a six‑week surrender period, and conditioned the confirmation of bail on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, stipulating that more than two prior cases would lead to denial of confirmation.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence is sufficient grounds to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8037 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-851 Year-2025 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali
======================================================
Ravi Kumar Son of Chandeshwar Singh Resident of village - Hasanpur PO-
Dumduma PS and District -Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Bela Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-03-2026 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 has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of
recovery of 315 litres of liquor from two 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
occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against himself
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8037 of 2026(3) dt.30-03-2026
2/3
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 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 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 Vaishali P.S. Case No. 851 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, 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
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8037 of 2026(3) dt.30-03-2026
3/3
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…