Patna High Court
Sudama GandharvaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
Sudama Gandharva, owner of a vehicle from which 2016 litres of liquor were seized, was charged under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing he had a clean record, was not in possession of the liquor, and was unaware that his driver misused the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bail bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle, without actual possession of the seized liquor, suffices to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- possession
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88332 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-333 Year-2024 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR District-
Saharsa
======================================================
Sudama Gandharva S/o Sharikah Gandharva Resident of Village / Mohalla -
Kasiya Tari Pathargama, District - Godda, State - Jharkhand, Pin - 814147.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rana Veer Prawar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 20-01-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
41(1) 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 2016 liters of liquor from a truck.
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.88332 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated
and at the same time shall bring disrepute to his business, it is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Pramod would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who
was also apprehended from the spot along with Vasisth.
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
Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 333 of 2024 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88332 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
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
Checking your session…