Patna High Court

Vijay Kumar GhoshversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court confirmed the provisional anticipatory bail on the same terms and conditions.

Summary

Vijay Kumar Ghosh applied for anticipatory bail in a case where 18 litres of liquor were recovered from his motorcycle, leading to charges under IPC sections 272, 273, 414/34 and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act. The petitioner argued that the vehicle belonged to him, that he had no knowledge of its misuse, and that he possessed a clean antecedent. The police had not submitted the required report on the vehicle’s ownership despite being directed to do so. The learned counsel for the State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, confirmed the provisional anticipatory bail granted on 22‑12‑2025 on the same terms and conditions. Consequently, the petitioner was allowed to remain on anticipatory bail pending any further investigation.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seizure of liquor from his vehicle and pending police report
Whether ownership of the vehicle and lack of knowledge of its misuse absolve the petitioner from liability under IPC sections 272, 273, 414/34 and Excise Act Section 30(a)

Legislation cited

Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34, 414

Subjects

anticipatory bail
vehicle seizure
liquor possession
IPC
Excise Act
ownership
clean antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87938 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2023 Thana- DEODHA District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Vijay Kumar Ghosh Son of Sukumar Ghosh R/o Ward no. 20, J.P. Chowk,
                 Near Bajrangwali Mandir, P.S. - Darbhanga Town, Dist. - Darbhanga, Bihar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Padmanabh Kashyap
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms.Meena Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   10-03-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his

                   arrest in Devdha P. S. Case No.50 of 2023 registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 and 414/34 of the

                   I.P.C. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the case was taken up on 22.12.2025, when petitioner was

                   directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail and the

                   Superintendent of Police concerned was directed to submit his

                   report in respect of the vehicle in question on the basis of its

                   ownership, registration number, engine number and chassis

                   number.

                                4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87938 of 2025(5) dt.10-03-2026
                                                           2/2




                         no report has been submitted by the Superintendent of Police,

                         but then, it is not in dispute that the seized vehicle belonged to

                         the petitioner. It is further submitted that allegation is of

                         recovery of 18 litres of liquor from the motorcycle and the

                         petitioner 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 a crime and

                         thus, would create evidence against himself and hence, would

                         get implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was

                         completely unaware that Nikhil would misuse the vehicle in the

                         manner as alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot. It is

                         further submitted that petitioner is a person with clean

                         antecedent.

                                      5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail

                         application.

                                      6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                         counsel for the petitioner, the provisional anticipatory bail

                         granted to the petitioner by order dated 22.12.2025 is confirmed

                         on the same terms and conditions.


                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…