Dhanjit Singh @ Dhananjay SinghversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1036 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2025 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Dhanjit Singh @ Dhananjay Singh S/O Gopalji Singh @ Gopal Singh @
                 Gopal Jee Singh R/O Village- Badka Baiju Tola, P.S- Rivilganj, Distt.- Saran.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Rajeev Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-01-2026                  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

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of eight cases, out of which, seven

                   cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of

                   182.42 litres of liquor from a Hyundai car and a motorcycle. It

                   is next submitted 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 motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent

                   person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1036 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
                                            2/3




          and thus would create evidence against himself and hence

          would get implicated. It is thus submitted that the petitioner was

          completely unaware that his nephew Sachin would misuse his

          vehicle in the manner as alleged, who was also apprehended

          from the spot along with Pankaj but then police in mechanical

          manner implicates once an accused is implicated in a case

          relating to excise, without holding a proper investigation. .

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

          within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) 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

          Rivilganj P.S. Case No.233/2025, subject to the conditions as

          laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       6. 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 more than 8
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1036 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       cases, 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

                       on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of 8

                       cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                       be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T