Sunil Kumar @ BengaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17343 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-784 Year-2025 Thana- MANER District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Sunil Kumar @ Benga S/o Niranjan Ray Resident of Village- Hulashi Tola,
                 PS- Maner, Distt- Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Saroj Kumar Choudhary
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Ramesh Chandra
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   19-03-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his

                   arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act

                   and allegation is of recovery of 100 litres of liquor from a place

                   near bank of Sone River.

                                4. The 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 alleged

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

                   and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17343 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
                                            2/3




          at the instance of Chaukidar, but then, it is submitted that if

          Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the

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

          institution of the present 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 petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

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

          provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the

          sum 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 Maner P. S. Case No.784 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.17343 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
                                                           3/3




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

                         accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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

                         obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his 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 has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the

                         provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T