Dilip Kumar @ Dilip RayversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13411 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2025 Thana- Benibad District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Ray Son of Late Uma Ray Resident of Bharatnagar, P.S.
                 - Gaighat(O.P. Benibad), Dist. - Muzaffarur.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Madhusudan Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-03-2026               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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 68.36 litres of liquor from a place behind the house

                   of the petitioner and 162.64 litres of liquor from a place behind

                   the house of Devendra Rai.

                             4.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13411 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                            2/3




          but then is adjacent to his house. It is further submitted that he

          came to be implicated based on secret information which is the

          easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper

          investigation. It is also submitted that of late police has started

          implicating accused in cases relating to Excise, who have

          antecedent apart from Excise case.

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

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                   6.     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 trial court within a

          period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional

          anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees

          Five 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 Benibad P.S. Case No.

          142 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

          482(2) of the BNSS.

                   7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one

          case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13411 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

                        confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has

                        antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory

                        bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T