Patna High Court
Ramdev PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Ramdev Paswan applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered against him under IPC sections 272, 273 and 34 and Excise Act section 30(a) for allegedly recovering 27 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. The petitioner argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor; he was implicated merely as the owner of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. in the present facts?
- Whether ownership of the vehicle, without conscious possession of the liquor, suffices to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- IPC offences
- Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91552 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2024 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani
======================================================
Ramdev Paswan Son of Late Subodh Paswan Resident of Village- Than tol,
Jaynagar, P.S.- Jaynagar, District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 272, 273 and 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 30(a) of the
Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 27 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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.91552 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing a crime 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 as he
was also apprehended at the spot along with Sampat.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Jaynagar P. S. Case No.71 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91552 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…