Patna High Court
Vivek KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedent.
Summary
Vivek Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he may be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 165.150 litres of liquor from a rented room belonging to Shivnath Sah. The petitioner asserted that he has a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and had vacated the premises well before the alleged incident. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the offence is non‑bailable. The Court considered the petitioner's clean record, lack of direct possession, and the nature of the allegation, and granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and verification of his antecedent by the trial court. The order conditions that if any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91979 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2025 Thana- PATRAKARNAGAR District- Patna
======================================================
Vivek Kumar son of Rabindra Yadav Resident of Village - Bulakibigha PS –
Jehanabad, District - Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rahul Ranjan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sucheta Yadav, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-03-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 165.150 litres of liquor from a rented room of the
house of Shivnath Sah.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a room which does not belong to the petitioner
and petitioner was not a tenant in the said house, rather had left
the house much earlier but then came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91979 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026
2/3
the secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone without holding a proper investigation of the case,
when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
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, let the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender 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 Patrakar Nagar P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91979 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026
3/3
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…