Dinesh Chaudhry Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Bihari Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhiya Kishor ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 15-07-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 45 litres of liquor from a car.

¶16

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 an occurrence and thus would

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47221 of 2026(2) dt.15-07-2026 2/3

¶18

create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is thus submitted that the petitioner was completely unaware that his driver would misuse his vehicle in the manner as alleged, who also fled from the spot.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 Hawai Adda P.S. Case No.123/2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

¶21

It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47221 of 2026(2) dt.15-07-2026 3/3

¶23

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.

¶24

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶25

amit/-

¶26

U T

Dinesh Chaudhry v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Chaudhry v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalan Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Chaudhary @ Akhilesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Prem Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Haridyanand Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Gopi Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Pradeep Kumar @ Pradeep Sharma Vs The State of Bihar