Niraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29826 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-398 Year-2026 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Niraj Kumar S/O Vinod Rai R/O Village - Jiyalal Chowk, P.S- Ahiyapur,
                 District - Muzaffarpur

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

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

2   01-07-2026                     Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, learned Additional

                   Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest connection

                   with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 398 of 2026, F.I.R. dated

                   24.02.2026 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 30(a), 41 of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act, 2022.

                                3. Recovery is of 857.52 liters of illicit liquor.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

                   implicated in the present case. It appears from the F.I.R. that

                   altogether 857.52 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from the

                   vehicles in question and the name of the petitioner has been

                   transpired on the basis of disclosure made by apprehended co-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29826 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                            2/4




          accused person, namely, Raja Kumar and except the aforesaid,

          no other cogent material has come during investigation to

          suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present

          occurrence. Therefore, the recovery cannot be attributed to the

          petitioner. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure

          prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr. P.C./ Section

          103 of BNSS, 2023 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.

                       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.LJ.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid

          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 the fact that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29826 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                            3/4




          petitioner having clean antecedent and nothing has been

          recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner or the

          house of the petitioner and the petitioner has been made accused

          on the basis of disclosure made by apprehended co-accused

          person, 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 learned

          Exclusive Special Court Excise-I, Muzaffarpur in connection

          with Ahiyapur PS. Case No. 398 of 2026, subject to the

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

          Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with

          other following conditions:-

                       1. 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.

                       2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

          witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

          for cancellation of bail.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29826 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                                       4/4




                                      3. 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)
Ibrar//-

U