Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail anticipating arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 47 of the Excise Act for allegedly possessing 18 litres of liquor. He argued that he had no ownership of the seized vehicle, was not arrested on the spot, and the police had implicated him mechanically based on a sale agreement that was never completed. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs 500 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The court directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed immediately. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 30(a) and 47 of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of ownership and non‑possession of the seized vehicle justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code are satisfied.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 47
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 47
- Section 438
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89081 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE PAKRIBARAWAN District-
Nawada
======================================================
Nitish Kumar S/O Shivnandan Prasad R/O Village- Samsera, P.S.- Rajgir,
Distt.- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nand Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) and 47 of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 18 litres of liquor from a car.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on a sale
agreement paper printed on a letter pad recording that petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89081 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
had purchased the car in question. It is submitted that petitioner
never purchased the car nor the ownership was ever transferred,
but police in mechanical manner implicated him.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 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 Trial Court
where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with
Excise Pakari Barawan P. S. Case No.137 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. 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.89081 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…