Patna High Court

Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 8 January 2026
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

Manoj Kumar, the owner of a Scorpio vehicle, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of five litres of liquor from his vehicle. He contended that he had no knowledge of the liquor, was not arrested at the spot, and that his nephew Hira Lal had misused the vehicle without his consent. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. The court stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be cancelled, whereas a clean record would lead to confirmation of the bail.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
Whether ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the contraband, suffices to justify denial of anticipatory bail

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30
Section 482
vehicle ownership
criminal antecedent
bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90629 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2025 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Manoj Kumar son of Basawan Ram Resident Of Village - Laheri Ps- Kochas
                 District -Rohtas

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Rabindra Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Shaheen Begum
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-01-2026               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 Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 5 litres of liquor from a Scorpio vehicle.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90629 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that his nephew Hira Lal would misuse the vehicle in the

          manner as alleged, who was also apprehended along with

          Ravindra.

                   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, 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 Kargahar

          P.S. Case No. 329 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid

          down under Section 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 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

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90629 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…