Dilip Rai @ Dilip KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31532 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2026 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Dilip Rai @ Dilip Kumar S/o- Modi Rai R/v- Harpur Jhakhra Ps- Kalyanpur
                 Dist- Samastipur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Rohit Kumar Shrivastava
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-05-2026                  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 30(a) and

                   41(1) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 3602.16 litres of liquor from a truck.

                   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 the seized vehicle and he came to be

                   implicated at the instance of chowkidar with whom he is on an

                   inimical term. It is also submitted that if chowkidar was aware

                   of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31532 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
                                            2/3




          he did not inform the police prior to 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 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.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen 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 Kalyanpur P.S. Case No.08/2026, 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

          three cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31532 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
                                                         3/3




                       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 three

                       cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                       be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T