Patna High Court

Abhimanyu Paul @ Abhimanyu PalversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 5 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 antecedent, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

The petitioner, Abhimanyu Paul, was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 56(b) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 108 litres of liquor from his Hyundai car. He argued that he had no knowledge of the liquor, was not in possession of it, and that the seizure was solely because he owned the vehicle. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, noting the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond and two sureties, and directed verification of his criminal record under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise, it would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged contraband was found in his vehicle but not in his possession.
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of knowledge of the liquor justify granting anticipatory bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Section 482
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88947 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
                                                    District- Kishanganj
                 ======================================================
                 Abhimanyu Paul @ Abhimanyu Pal Son of Govind Paul Resident of Village -
                 Tuli Bidhannagar, Kumhar Tuli, P.S.- Phansiduwa, District - Darjeeling
                 (W.B.)

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr.Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   05-01-2026               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

                   56(b) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 108 litres of liquor from a Hundai Car.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested 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.88947 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
                                            2/3




          his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that the driver of the vehicle would misuse the vehicle in the

          manner as alleged.

                   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 Special

          P.S. Case No. 139 of 2020, C.I.S. No. 139 of 2020, 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 antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88947 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        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)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…