Patna High Court
Makun RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the conditions imposed.
Summary
The petitioner, Makun Ram, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 48.2 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor, asserting that his son had misused the vehicle without his knowledge. 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 and two sureties, with the condition that the trial court verify the petitioner’s antecedent within six weeks. If any prior case is found, the bail may be cancelled; if the petitioner is found to have a clean record, the bail will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case of alleged liquor possession under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to establish culpability
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Smuggling Act — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90760 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-524 Year-2025 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Makun Ram S/O Late Mukhlal Ram R/O Village- Laukeriya, Ward No. 10,
Police Station- Bairiya, District- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, 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 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 48.2 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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.90760 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his son, namely, Sandeep Kumar
would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was 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 Bairiya
P.S. Case No. 524 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
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.90760 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
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…