Dharmendra Chaurasia @ Dharmendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17301 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2024 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Dharmendra Chaurasia @ Dharmendra Kumar S/o Kanhaiya Bhagat @
                 Kanhaiya Chaurasia R/o Village- Lauva Kala, P.S.-Baniyapur, District- Saran
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Binod Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   19-03-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of five cases out of which four cases

                   are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 5.4

                   litres of liquor from a sack near the roadside and 5 litres of

                   liquor from palani of Birendra Mahato.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   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

                   and he has no concern or relation with Birendra Mahato. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17301 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
                                            2/3




          further submitted that petitioner came to be implicate at the

          instance of the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the

          Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the

          occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the

          institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the

          case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that once an accused

          is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start

          implicating mechanically either at the instance of the

          Chawkidar, local person, secret information or confessional

          statement without holding a proper investigation of the 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, 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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-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 Baniyapur P.S.

          Case No. 212 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down

          under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17301 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                                  7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial

                     Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if

                     it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five cases,

                     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 has antecedent of only five cases in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T