Raj Kumar SahniversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13222 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2025 Thana- LAKHAURA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
           1.     Raj Kumar Sahni S/o- Sukat Sahni Village- Jhitkahiya PS- Lakhaura Dist-
                  East Champaran
           2.    Bhushan Sahni S/o- Dhanai Sahni Village- Jhitkahiya PS- Lakhaura Dist-
                 East Champaran
           3.     Chandeshwar Rai S/o- Late Banka Rai Village- Dostiya PS- Lakhaura Dist-
                  East Champaran
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Amit Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Ms.Asha Devi
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-03-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their

                   arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 30(a), 32 and 41(1) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of three cases under the

                   Excise Act and petitioner nos.2 and 3 have antecedent of one

                   case under the Excise Act and the allegation is of recovery of

                   170 litres of liquor from a place near a bamboo orchard.

                                4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13222 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                            2/3




          recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the

          petitioners and they came to be implicated at the instance of

          local person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the

          name of the petitioners is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts

          an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted

          that police in majority of cases implicating innocent persons

          either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret

          information and confessional statement in a mechanical manner

          without holding a proper investigation.

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

          application.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

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

          event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

          within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in

          the sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each 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 Lakhaura P. S. Case No.161 of 2025, subject

          to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                       7. The application stands allowed.
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13222 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                                           3/3




                                      8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after

                         accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall

                         verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,

                         if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of more than

                         three cases and petitioner nos.2 and 3 have antecedent of more

                         than one case, then it would be presumed that petitioners for the

                         purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their

                         antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present

                         provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if

                         on verification, it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of

                         three cases only and petitioner nos.2 and 3 have antecedent of

                         one case only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail

                         order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T