Javed Ali Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.621 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-340 Year-2023 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur

======================================================

Javed Ali S/o Yamin Ali R/o 10/128 Hamdard Nagar B, Jamalpur P.S.Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh. Permanent Address B-289, Gali No. 14, Shri Ram Nagar Colony, Rajiv Nagar, P.S.- Khajuri Khas, Delhi

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivanand Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 17-01-2026

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶12

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(i)(ii), 36 and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016-18.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 1522.920 litres of liquor from a bus.

¶14

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 bus. It is next submitted that no prudent person

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.621 of 2026(2) dt.17-01-2026 2/3

¶16

would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated and at the same time shall bring disrepute to his business. It is also submitted that petitioner being the owner was not aware that passengers were carrying liquor.

¶17

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

¶18

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court 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 Kanti P.S. Case No. 340 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.

¶19

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

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.621 of 2026(2) dt.17-01-2026 3/3

¶21

that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be 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.

¶22

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶23

Kundan/-

¶24

U T

Javed Ali v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Javed Ali 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

Raju Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Nira Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Bijendra Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Amrit Chauhan @ Pahari @ Sudhanshu Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar

Suchita Devi @ Suchita Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Pintu Yadav @ Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar