Patna High Court
Birendra Rai @ Birendra RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Birendra Rai, the owner of a vehicle from which 261.54 litres of liquor were seized, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. He argued that he had no knowledge of the liquor being transported, was not in possession at the time of seizure, and had a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle linked him to the offence. The High Court considered the lack of direct possession, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the principle that a prudent person would not use his own vehicle to create evidence against himself. It directed that provisional anticipatory bail be granted subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s antecedents under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The application was allowed, with the proviso that the bail may be withdrawn if any antecedent is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused is merely the owner of a vehicle from which contraband was seized and not in actual possession.
- Whether a clean criminal antecedent is a prerequisite for granting anticipatory bail in such cases.
- Whether the High Court may impose conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. while granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition Act
- clean antecedent
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88950 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2025 Thana- DARIHAT District- Rohtas
======================================================
Birendra Rai @ Birendra Ray S/o Gauri Rai R/o- Lalpokhar Dighi, P.S.-
Hajipur Sadar, District- Vaishalil
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 261.54 litres of liquor from a XUV 500 vehicle. It is
next submitted that 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 his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and
thus, would create evidence against himself and hence, would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88950 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Pawan Mahto would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot along with Md. Chand.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Judge, Excise Court No.1, Rohtas at Sasaram in
connection with Darihat P.S. Case No.48 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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 obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88950 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…