Patna High Court
Pradeep 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 antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Pradeep Kumar, was implicated in a case involving the seizure of 95.400 litres and 52.650 litres of liquor from four motorcycles, alleged under Sections 414 and 34 of the IPC and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. He contended that he was not present at the spot, had no liquor in his possession, and was only linked to the case because he owned the seized vehicle, asserting a clean antecedent. The State opposed his request 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. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS given the allegations under IPC and the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence is sufficient grounds to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 414
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor seizure
- IPC
- Bihar Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90998 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-478 Year-2023 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Pradeep Kumar S/o- Rajkumar @ Rajkumar Baitha Resident of Village-
Hariharpur PS- Sewrahi, Dist- Kushinagar, U.P
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Saurabh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bharat Lal
======================================================
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 414 and 34
of IPC and 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 95.400 litres of liquor along with 52.650 litres of
liquor from four different motorcycles.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90998 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 further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Rajesh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged,
who was also apprehended from the spot along with three other
accused persons.
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 Kateya
P.S. Case No. 478 of 2023 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90998 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
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)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…