Patna High Court
Budhan BhuiyanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Budhan Bhuiyan, a resident of Jharkhand, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, where 250 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from two motorcycles, one of which he owned. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, had a clean antecedent, and was unaware that his friend misused his vehicle. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order stipulated that the trial court must verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent; if any antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed, otherwise it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. when the alleged offence involves possession of liquor recovered from a vehicle he owns but was not in his conscious possession.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement justify the grant of provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Bihar Prohibition Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89337 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2025 Thana- DHIBRA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Budhan Bhuiyan S/O Sohrai Bhuiyan R/O Village- Turi, P.S.- Hariharganj,
Distt.- Palamu, Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Mukul Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) 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 250 litres of liquor from two motorcycles.
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 one of the seized vehicles. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89337 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
hence would get implicated. It is next submitted that petitioner
was completely unaware that his friend 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 Dhibra
P.S. Case No. 85 of 2025, 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.89337 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…