Jugal Kumar BaithaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16248 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2021 Thana- AWTARNAGAR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Jugal Kumar Baitha S/o- Ramvachan Baitha R/v- Raipatti PS - Dighwara
                 Dist- Saran
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh No. I, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-04-2026                  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 Sections 30(a)

                   and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is

                   of recovery of 200 litres of liquor from two motorcycles and

                   an auto.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing

                   was recovered from his conscious possession. It is further

                   submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the

                   fact that he is owner of the seized auto. It is next submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16248 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
                                            2/3




          that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for

          committing an occurrence and, thus, would create evidence

          against himself and, hence, would get implicated. It is also

          submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that

          Shailesh Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as

          alleged who was also apprehended from the spot along with

          Mithilesh Kumar and Ranjan Kumar.

                       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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the

          petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or

          surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be

          released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail

          bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Awtar Nagar P.S. Case No. 166 of 2021,

          subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2)

          of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16248 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of

                     the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent

                     of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioner had

                     concealed his antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the

                     anticipatory bail application in that event the provisional

                     anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is

                     found on verification that petitioner is a person with clean

                     antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail

                     order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T