Jitendra ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24404 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2026 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
           1.     Jitendra Chaudhary S/o Chandrika Chaudhary Resident Of Village-
                  Bhediharwa, Ps- Nautan, Dist.- West Champaran
           2.    Rohit Yadav @ Rameshwar Yadav S/o Madhusudhan Yadav @ Maksudan
                 Yadav Resident Of Village- Bhediharwa, Ps- Nautan, Dist.- West Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Ram Kishun Prasad
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Rabindra Kumar- A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-04-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their

                   arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise

                   Act and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of two cases under the

                   Excise Act and the allegation is of recovery of 47.7 litres of

                   liquor from a place near bank of a river.

                                4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24404 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
                                            2/3




          recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged

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

          petitioners and is accessible to public at large and they came to

          be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom they are

          on an inimical term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was

          aware of the involvement of the petitioners 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. Sri Rabindra Kumar opposes the

          anticipatory bail application.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the

          event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

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

          provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in

          the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

          Trial Court where the case is pending/ successor Court in
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24404 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
                                                           3/3




                         connection with Bairiya P. S. Case No.66 of 2026, 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 petitioners shall

                         verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,

                         if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of more than

                         one case and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of more than two

                         cases, then it would be presumed that petitioners for the

                         purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their

                         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 no.1 has antecedent of

                         one case only and petitioner no.2 has antecedent two cases only,

                         in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be

                         confirmed forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T