Patna High Court
Mahesh Kumar @ Mahesh Kumar Singh @ Mahesh SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted subject to conditions, as the petitioner had no direct possession and a clean antecedent.
Summary
Mahesh Kumar, the owner of a vehicle from which 150 litres of liquor were recovered, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. The petitioner argued that he had no direct possession of the liquor, was not arrested at the spot, and had a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle implicated him. The court considered the lack of direct possession and the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and directed that provisional anticipatory bail be granted on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and verification of his antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. when the accused is the owner of a vehicle from which contraband was recovered but has no direct possession?
- Whether ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged offence is sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92025 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-130 Year-2024 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada
======================================================
Mahesh Kumar @ Mahesh Kumar Singh @ Mahesh Singh S/o Shankar Singh
Resident of - Ward No. 8, Village - Tilaiya Basti Kharedwa, P.S - Jhumri
Tilaiya, District - Kodarma, State - Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Devendra Prasad Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Shaheen Begum
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 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 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 150 litres of liquor from two motorcycles.
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 one of the
seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92025 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
use 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 his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner
as alleged.
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
Rajauli P. S. Case No.130 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.92025 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
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…