Sourav KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23075 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2026 Thana- Vasudevpur District- Munger
                 ======================================================
                 Sourav Kumar S/O Late Chhatri Yadav @ Tarun Yadav Resident of Village-
                 Sherpur, P.S-Basudeopur, District-Munger- 811202.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Hemant Kumar Karan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-04-2026                     Heard Mr. Hemant Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumar, learned Additional Public

                   Prosecutor for the State.

                                   2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Basudeopur P.S. Case No. 20 of 2026, F.I.R

                   dated 17.02.2026 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                   3. Recovery is of 439.89 liters of illegal foreign

                   liquor.

                                   4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

                   the present case. He further submits that the allegation as

                   alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. He further submits

                   that it appears from the F.I.R that nothing has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23075 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
                                            2/4




          recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather

          the recovery has been made from the possession of co-accused,

          namely, Rahul Kumar and the said Rahul Kumar disclosed that

          the petitioner was also present at the place of occurrence. There

          is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for

          recovery under Section 103 and 105 of Bhartiya Nagarik

          Suraksha Sanhita and except the disclosure made by

          apprehended co-accused person, no other cogent material has

          come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the

          petitioner in the present occurrence. No case, whatsoever, would

          be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition

          and Excise Act.

                          5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

          petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of

          the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-

          arrest bail would not be maintainable. He further submits that

          petitioner carries three criminal antecedents in which he is on

          bail in all cases.

                          6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full

          Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar

          reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23075 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
                                            3/4




          down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on

          behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant

          of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of

          counsel for the petitioner.

                          7.     Considering         the       aforesaid   facts   and

          circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of

          his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of

          thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on

          bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          the learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise-II, Munger in

          connection with Basudeopur P.S. Case No. 20 of 2026, subject

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

          of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik

          Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-

                          i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

          properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

          and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

          on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

          reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                          ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

          witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23075 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
                                                        4/4




                      for cancellation of bail.

                                   iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                      verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                      any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                      criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                      cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                      acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                      shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                      verification.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-

U      T