Patna High Court
Ibran AnsariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Ibran Ansari, was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 47 of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 21.06 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in actual possession of the liquor, and was unaware that another individual, Sakib, had misused his vehicle. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court considered the submissions and, invoking its powers under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond and two sureties. The order conditioned the confirmation of bail on a verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any prior case is found, the provisional bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of ownership of the vehicle and lack of direct possession of the liquor
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent influences the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 47
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91342 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-866 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Purnia
======================================================
Ibran Ansari S/o- Md. Naem Ansari Resident of Chandi, Agaola P.S-
Ranipatra, Ps- Mufassil Dist- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sumit Kumar Bhagat, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, 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
47 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 21.06 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
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
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91342 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Sakib 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, 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 Excise
Purnea P.S. Case No. 866 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91342 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
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…