Santosh Singh @ Santosh Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17860 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2025 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Santosh Singh @ Santosh Kumar Singh Son of Late Suresh Singh Resident of
                 Village- Mattiaur, P.S.- Mohiuddinnagar, District- Samastipur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Mukesh Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Khurshid Anwar
                 ======================================================
                 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is

                   of recovery of 20 litres of liquor from tea shop of the petitioner.

                                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 tea shop is a public

                   place where customers come in large number. It is also

                   submitted that no prudent person would use his own shop for

                   committing a crime and thus, would create evidence against
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17860 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
                                            2/3




          himself and hence, would get implicated and at the same time

          shall bring disrepute to his business. It is further submitted that

          petitioner was completely unaware that Vinod Rai and Jaddu

          Paswan would misuse the shop in the manner as alleged and

          concealed meager amount of liquor as they were also

          apprehended.

                       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.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

          Mohanpur P. S. Case No.249 of 2025, subject to the conditions

          laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                       7. The application stands allowed.

                       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
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17860 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
                                                           3/3




                         found that petitioner has antecedent of even 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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the

                         provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T