Patna High Court
Paras ChauhanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Paras Chauhan, the owner of a vehicle from which 322 litres of liquor were seized, applied for anticipatory bail after the police alleged his involvement under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act. He argued that he had no knowledge of the liquor being transported and that the actual offenders, Mukesh and Piyush, were apprehended at the scene. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle linked him to the offence. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs. 500 bail bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the vehicle owner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case of alleged excise offences.
- Whether mere ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence suffices to justify arrest and denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent is a condition for confirming provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- excise offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90841 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-574 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Siwan
======================================================
Paras Chauhan Son of Mukesh Kumar Resident of Udupura, Fatehpur Lal
Bila Ahatmali, Bijnor, P.S. and District- Bijnor (Uttar Pradesh)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, Advocate
Mr. Jitesh Kaushik, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 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) and
32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 322 liters of liquor from a car.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90841 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Mukesh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who
was also apprehended from the spot along with Piyush.
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 Siwan
Excise P.S. Case No. 574 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90841 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…