Rahul Nut @ Rahul NatversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31167 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2026 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Rahul Nut @ Rahul Nat S/o Sanjay Nat R/o vill - Pakahan Nut Toli, P.S.-
                 Marhowrah, Distt.- Saran at Chapra
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                  ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Renuka Ratnakar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   29-06-2026                  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 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 105 litres of liquor from Pakahan

                   Nut Toli.

                                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

                   and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that

                   petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31167 of 2026(3) dt.29-06-2026
                                            2/3




          Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next

          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 also 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.5,000/- (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 Marhowrah

          (Marhowrah) P.S. Case No. 182 of 2026, 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.31167 of 2026(3) dt.29-06-2026
                                                       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 one

                     case, 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 one case in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T