Guddu ChauhanversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14830 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-562 Year-2025 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Guddu Chauhan S/o Mahesh Chauhan @ Mahesh Noniya Resident of
                 Village- Lamichur, P.S.- Bhore, District- Gopalganj

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Vikash Kumar Shukla
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Kanhiya Kishor
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-03-2026               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 317(5) of

                   BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases

                   are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 72

                   litres of liquor from a motorcycle.

                             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 is not the owner of

                   the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated at the instance

                   of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14830 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                            2/3




          submitted that if the Chowkidar was aware about the

          involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did

          not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR,

          which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is

          further submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case

          relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically

          either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional

          statement or secret information without holding a proper

          investigation.

                   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. 15,000/- (Rupees

          Fifteen 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 Bhore P.S. Case No.

          562 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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14830 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                                          3/3




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

                        three cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the

                        purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent

                        before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order

                        shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that

                        petitioner has antecedent of three cases in that event the

                        provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T