Vijay Kumar Ghosh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87938 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2023 Thana- DEODHA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Vijay Kumar Ghosh Son of Sukumar Ghosh R/o Ward no. 20, J.P. Chowk, Near Bajrangwali Mandir, P.S. - Darbhanga Town, Dist. - Darbhanga, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Padmanabh Kashyap For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-03-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Devdha P. S. Case No.50 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 and 414/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case was taken up on 22.12.2025, when petitioner was directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail and the Superintendent of Police concerned was directed to submit his report in respect of the vehicle in question on the basis of its ownership, registration number, engine number and chassis number.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87938 of 2025(5) dt.10-03-2026 2/2 no report has been submitted by the Superintendent of Police, but then, it is not in dispute that the seized vehicle belonged to the petitioner. It is further submitted that allegation is of recovery of 18 litres of liquor from the motorcycle and the 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 a crime and thus, would create evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Nikhil would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot. It is further submitted that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the provisional anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner by order dated 22.12.2025 is confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T