Patna High Court
Krishan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Krishan Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 76.83 litres of liquor from his vehicle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware of any misuse of his vehicle by the driver. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC. The order stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where the accused is the owner of the vehicle and not in direct possession of the contraband.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. must be imposed for anticipatory bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.962 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-245 Year-2025 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Krishan Kumar S/o Arun Kumar R/o Vill- Naya Tola, Sabnima, P.S-
Athmalgola, Distt- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 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 76.83 litres of liquor from a car.
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 the seized
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.962 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
his driver 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
Bakhtiyarpur P. S. Case No.245 of 2025, 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
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.962 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
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…