Patna High Court
Amar Kumar @ Amar Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The application for anticipatory bail is allowed, with provisional bail granted subject to conditions.
Summary
Amar Kumar sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for allegedly possessing three litres of liquor in a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in actual possession of the liquor, and was unaware that another person, Sankit Kumar, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and subject to Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Court directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent and stipulated that the bail would be revoked if any prior case is found, otherwise it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor possession
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 482
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91892 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2024 Thana- Excise Benipatti District- Madhubani
======================================================
Amar Kumar @ Amar Kumar Sah Son of Ramnath Sah Resident of Village-
Charaut, P.S.- Charaut, District- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 3 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next
submitted 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
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, would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91892 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Sankit Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the
manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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-bond in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special
Judge (Excise Judge/Excise Act), Madhubani in connection with
Benepatti Excise P.S. Case No.44 of 2024, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. 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
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91892 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
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)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…