Patna High Court
Md. ShabbirversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail for the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Shabbir, was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 45 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for the alleged recovery of 324 litres of liquor from an auto he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and was unaware that the driver misused his vehicle. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500, two sureties of the same amount, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with a condition that the bail would be confirmed only if the petitioner is found to have a clean antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged liquor seizure and vehicle ownership.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle implicates the petitioner in the offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Bihar Prohibition Act
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89299 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-399 Year-2024 Thana- PALASI District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Shabbir S/O Md. Moharram @ Moharram Ali R/O Village- Mohania,
Ward No. 01, P.S.-Palasi, District- Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhav Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 22-01-2026 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
45 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 324 litres of liquor from an auto.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89299 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that the driver of the auto 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, let 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 Plasi P.S.
Case No. 399 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89299 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…