Patna High Court
Sanjeeet Kumar ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond, sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjeeet Kumar Choudhary, sought anticipatory bail after the police alleged that 650 ml of liquor was recovered from a vehicle he owned, invoking Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that another individual, Md. Javed, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle implicated the petitioner. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS in view of the alleged liquor seizure.
- Whether mere ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence suffices to establish culpability.
- What conditions may be imposed on the grant of anticipatory bail in such excise cases.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
- Bihar Prohibition Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9960 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2022 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Sanjeeet Kumar Choudhary S/O Jaichandra Choudhary Resident of village-
Jalpaiguri, P.S -Banarhat, District- West Bangal.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kumar, 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) 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 650 ml. of liquor from a car.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9960 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
and thus would create evidence against himself and hence
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Md. Javed 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 Excise P.S. Case No. 237 of 2022, 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.9960 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…