Patna High Court
Rajesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of his antecedent, as ownership of the vehicle without proof of possession does not justify denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly transporting 50 litres of liquor in a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and was unaware of his brother‑in‑law's alleged misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, considering the petitioner's clean antecedent and lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and sureties, with conditions for verification of his criminal record by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner without proof of possession.
- Whether the petitioner's clean antecedent warrants grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- Cr.P.C. 438
- BNSS 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9966 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- PIRO District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Rajesh Kumar Son of Raju Sah Resident of Village- Sonbarsha, Kesath, P.S.-
Nawa Nagar, District- Buxar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bibhakar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akbar Ali, 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, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 50 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.9966 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his brother-in-law, namely, Sushil
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 Piro P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025, 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.9966 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.