Patna High Court
Devanand Prasad Gupta @ D.P. GuptaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail may be granted provisionally when the petitioner has no direct involvement, a clean antecedent, and the allegations arise solely from vehicle ownership.
Summary
The petitioner, Devanand Prasad Gupta, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged possession of 77.760 litres of liquor recovered from his Tata Safari. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the liquor; the vehicle was misused by a third person, Vikram Kumar, who was apprehended. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner was implicated by ownership of the vehicle. The Court considered the petitioner's lack of direct involvement, his clean record, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. It ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, pending verification of his antecedent by the trial court.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to a person alleged to be implicated solely by ownership of a vehicle used in an excise offence?
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession justify granting provisional anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Section 482 BNSS
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91994 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-808 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Devanand Prasad Gupta @ D.P. Gupta S/o Late Mukhlal Sah R/o Vill-
Chhegan Neora, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 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
32(3) 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 77.760 litres of liquor from a Tata Safari.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91994 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
and thus would create evidence against himself and hence
would get implicated. It is next submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Vikram Kumar 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, let 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
P.S. Case No. 808 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91994 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed but if it is found on verification that 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…