Lal Babu @ Lal Babu RayversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30729 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- BHAIRAVSHTHAN District-
                                                       Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Lal Babu @ Lal Babu Ray Son of Uday Roy @ Uday Ray @ Udhawa Ray
                 R/o Village - Siswar, P.S.- Phulparas, District - Madhubani.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ratnakar Jha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Rajesh Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-05-2026                  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 Sections 274, 275

                   and 3(5) of the BNS and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 439.200 litres of liquor from two

                   different vehicles. It is next submitted that petitioner was not

                   arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his

                   conscious possession and is not the owner of any of the seized

                   vehicle and he came to be implicated based on secret
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30729 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
                                            2/3




          information which is the easiest way to implicate someone. It is

          also submitted that Ravi was apprehended but then he did not

          disclose the name of the petitioner. It is also submitted that once

          an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police

          starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local

          person, confessional statement or secret information without

          holding a proper investigation.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, 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.5000/- (Rupees five 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 Bhairavsthan P.S. Case No.140/2025, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the

          B.N.S.S.

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

          shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30729 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
                                                         3/3




                       one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had

                       concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

                       provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

                       on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one

                       case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be

                       confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T