Patna High Court
Jay Prakash SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to bond and conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Jay Prakash Sah, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging offences under IPC sections 279, 337 and 338 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for the recovery of 25 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that another person, Ravindra Kumar, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs 500 bail‑bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle from which liquor was recovered makes the petitioner liable for the offences.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged clean antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 279, 337, 338
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC 279
- IPC 337
- IPC 338
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- illegal liquor
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9517 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas
======================================================
Jay Prakash Sah Son of Ram Lagan Sah Resident of Mohalla - Prabhakar
Rauja, Road No.- 1, Kampani Sarai (Sasaram), P.S.- Sasaram Nagar, District -
Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., 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 offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of
the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 30(a) of 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 25 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9517 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus,
would create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Ravindra 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
Excise Judge-II, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Rohtas
(Amjhor) P.S. Case No.24 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
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
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9517 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
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)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…