Sujit Kumar @ FaramversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27177 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1301 Year-2025 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Sujit Kumar @ Faram S/O Ashok Yadav Resident of village- Murkatta,
                 Gandhar, PS- Mufassil, District-Gaya jee
                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                              ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   24-04-2026                  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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of six cases out of which three cases

                   are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 120

                   litres of liquor from an auto near Falgu River.

                                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 even the alleged

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

                   It is further submitted submitted that petitioner is not the owner

                   of the seized vehicle and came to be implicated at the instance
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27177 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
                                            2/3




          of the Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is

          further submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the

          involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did

          not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR

          which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is

          next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case

          relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either

          at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional

          statement or secret information without holding a proper

          investigation of the case.

                       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.30,000/-

          (Rupees Thirty 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 Gaya Mufassil

          P.S. Case No. 1301 of 2025, 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.27177 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
                                                       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 more than six

                     cases, 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 has antecedent of only six cases in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T