Patna High Court

Anupam KhekettaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 22 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of his antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

The petitioner, Anupam Kheketta, sought anticipatory bail after a police seizure of 1,206 litres of liquor from a pickup vehicle he owned, alleging he had no knowledge of the illicit use of the vehicle. He argued he had a clean criminal record and that ownership alone should not implicate him. The State opposed the bail, contending the seizure related to offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, conditioning it on the petitioner furnishing a bail bond and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify his antecedents. If any prior case is found, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether mere ownership of the seized vehicle suffices to implicate the petitioner.
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent status affects the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail
excise law
vehicle seizure
clean antecedent
Section 30
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83010 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2025 Thana- BATIYA District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Anupam Kheketta Son of Shushil Kerkerketta @ Sushil Kerketta Resident of
                 Village- A.T. Tower, Mother Teresa Road, Asansol, P.S.- Asansol, District-
                 Burdwan (W.B.)

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms. Asha Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-01-2026                  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

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 1206 liters of liquor from a pick up vehicle.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83010 of 2025(2) dt.22-01-2026
                                            2/3




          his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that

          Abhijeet would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who

          was also apprehended from the spot along with Ainul.

                       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.

          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 Batia P.S.

          Case No. 62 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 even

          one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the

          purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83010 of 2025(2) dt.22-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional

                      anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after

                      verification if 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)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…