Patna High Court
Santosh Kumar @ Sanoth KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Santosh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018, for allegedly possessing 8.3 litres of liquor recovered from his motorcycle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in actual possession at the time of seizure, and was implicated merely as the owner of the vehicle, unaware of its misuse by another individual, Mukesh Kumar. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail may be revoked, whereas a clean record would lead to confirmation of the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle, without actual possession of the liquor, suffices to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9957 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2023 Thana- KUTUMBA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Santosh Kumar @ Sanoth Kumar Son of Ashok Ram Resident of Village-
Baraon Kala, P.S.- Akodhi Gola, District- Rohtas (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 8.3 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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
and thus would create evidence against himself and hence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9957 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Mukesh Kumar would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot.
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 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 Kutumba P.S. Case No. 42 of 2023, 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
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9957 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.