Niraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22378 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2026 Thana- NALANDA District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Niraj Kumar Son of Late Kailash Kumar R/o Village - Muzaffarpur, P.S And
                 District - Nalanda
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) 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 3.42 litres of liquor from the straw room of the

                   petitioner near his poultry farm.

                                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 straw room is a

                   place outside the poultry farm and, thus, is accessible to

                   villagers at large. It is further submitted that no prudent person

                   would use his own premises for committing an occurrence and,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22378 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                            2/3




          thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence, would

          get implicated. It is next submitted that it appears that someone

          inimical to the petitioner concealed meager amount of liquor

          with a view to bring disrepute to his business of poultry. It is

          also submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the

          instance of the local person but then the name of the person who

          disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR

          which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when

          petitioner has not been implicated in the case based on the secret

          information and is a person with clean antecedent.

                       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 Nalanda P.S. Case

          No. 38 of 2026, 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.22378 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                                  7. However, 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 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