Patna High Court
Randhir KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
Randhir Kumar, the owner of two scooties from which 70 litres of liquor were seized, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., claiming he had no conscious possession of the liquor and was unaware that others misused his vehicles. He argued that his clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement should preclude arrest. The State opposed the bail, contending the ownership linked him to the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and ordered verification of the petitioner's criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is found, the bail may be revoked; if none, the provisional order will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. in a case of alleged possession of liquor recovered from vehicles he owned
- Whether ownership of the vehicles implicates the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- ownership of vehicle
- criminal antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89813 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2025 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Nawada
======================================================
Randhir Kumar S/o Kuleshwar Chaudhary R/o vill - Bara, P.S.- Fatehpur,
Distt.- Gayaji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Madhuri Lata, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 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 Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 70 litres of liquor from two scooty.
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 both the seized scooty. 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.89813 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner
was completely unaware that Jitendra Kumar and Ramesh
Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who
were also apprehended from the spot.
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 Sitamarhi
P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89813 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
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…