Patna High Court
Kartik KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that, given the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of knowledge of the alleged contravention, he is entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, subject to conditions prescribed in Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Kartik Kumar, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case (Bidupur P.S. Case No.658/2025) alleging violation of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly transporting 43.74 litres of illicit liquor in a car he owned. He contended that he was not present at the time of seizure and had lent the vehicle to his brother, Pawan Kumar, in good faith, having no knowledge of the contraband. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The Court examined the FIR, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the lack of any proven participation or knowledge, and noted the State’s failure to enforce its liquor policy. Concluding that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for bail, the Court ordered his release on pre‑arrest bail subject to a bond and sureties, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order also directed the District Court to verify the petitioner’s criminal record, with the bail order to lapse if adverse findings emerge.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of presence at the time of seizure and absence of knowledge of the illicit liquor negate the likelihood of tampering or culpability.
- Whether a clean antecedent suffices to justify pre‑arrest bail in this offence.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the BNSS can be invoked to condition the bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- illicit liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- Section 482(2) BNSS
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8117 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-658 Year-2025 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Kartik Kumar S/o Pasupati Das R/o vill- Khanpur Pakari, P.S.- Bidupur,
Distt.- Vaishali, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Shantanu Kumar,
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Bidupur P.S. Case No. 658/2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, 43.74 litres
of illicit liquor was recovered from a car bearing registration
No.BR31AZ7532.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in the present case. Admittedly, at the time of
the alleged seizure and recovery of illicit liquor, petitioner was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8117 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
not present and he has been made accused in this case, being the
owner of the vehicle in question, which was given by the
petitioner to his brother/co-accused/Pawan Kumar in good faith
and petitioner had no idea that he was carrying liquor on the
said car. Petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation
made in the FIR and also the fact that the State has failed to
implement its liquor policy in its true spirit, I am of the opinion
that petitioner, who is having clean antecedent, has, prima
facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Concerned Court where the case is
pending in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No. 658/2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8117 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the
petitioner is involved in some other cases, as what has been
stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will
automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…