Patna High Court
Rakesh Kumar DevversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to bail bonds and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, with the order to be confirmed if no prior case is found.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar Dev, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, for the alleged recovery of 114.9 litres of liquor from his auto. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and was unaware that his driver misused the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is found, the bail may be cancelled; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the accused is only the owner of the vehicle and not in actual possession of the contraband.
- Whether a clean antecedent suffices to justify anticipatory bail under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 41
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- vehicle ownership
- possession
- clean antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 41
- CrPC Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89018 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2025 Thana- KEWATI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Rakesh Kumar Dev Son of Late Vinod Lal Dev Resident of Village - Mekna,
P.S.- Kewati, District - Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Shweta Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 41 of Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 114.900 litres of liquor from an auto. 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 get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89018 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that his driver would misuse the vehicle in the manner
as alleged.
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 Court of
Special Judge, Excise-I, Darbhanga in connection with Kewati
P.S. Case No.166 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
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89018 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
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…