Patna High Court
Jitendra Kumar ShawversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedents and compliance with the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitendra Kumar Shaw, sought anticipatory bail after a police raid recovered 2,997 litres of liquor from a Hyva truck he owned. He argued he had no prior criminal record and was unaware that his brother had misused the vehicle, asserting that the liquor was not in his conscious possession. The State opposed the bail, contending the seizure implicated the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. The court, considering the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and sureties, and directed verification of his criminal record. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90739 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-210 Year-2025 Thana- Lakho District- Begusarai
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar Shaw S/O Om Prakash Shaw Resident of Village- Yadavpara,
Mahabir Colliery, Police Station- Raniganj, District- Bardhhaman, State- West
Bengal.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 Sections 30(a),
32(i)(ii) and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 2997 litres of liquor from a Hyva Truck.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90739 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence
and thus would create evidence against himself and hence
would get implicated and at the same time shall bring disrepute
to his business. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his brother, namely, Ritesh Saw would
misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also
apprehended from the spot along with Anshu Kumar and
Gautam Kumar.
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 Lakho
P.S. Case No. 210 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482 of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90739 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
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
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…