Patna High Court
Raju Baitha @ Raju KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of his antecedents, as ownership of the vehicle alone does not justify arrest.
Summary
The petitioner, Raju Baitha, sought anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, where 144 litres of liquor were recovered from his motorcycle. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was unaware of its misuse by another person, and that his ownership of the vehicle alone should not constitute grounds for arrest, especially given his limited criminal antecedents. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal record under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order stipulated that if more than three antecedent cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether mere ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged offence justifies arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. apply to provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9491 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-259 Year-2025 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Raju Baitha @ Raju Kumar son of Nandu Baitha Resident of Masha Alam
PS- Bairgania Distt- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dwij Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 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.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedents of three cases and allegation is of
recovery of 144 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 the
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.9491 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Sunil Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the
manner as alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot. It
is further submitted that off late police has started implicating
accused persons who are having criminal antecedent in excise
cases without holding a proper investigation.
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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court of
Exclusive Special Judge Excise, Court No.-I, Sitamarhi in
connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No.259 of 2025, 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 bond of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9491 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedents of more than three cases,
then it 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 has antecedents of only three cases, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.