Rajesh RaiversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31642 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2026 Thana- CHIRAIYA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Rajesh Rai Son of Late Ram Ayodhya Rai @ Late Ram Ayodhya Ray
                 Resident of Village- Motnaze, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Abhishek Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-05-2026               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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of eleven cases out of which nine cases

                   are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 810.2

                   litres of liquor from the house of Virendra Rai.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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 petitioner has no concern or relation with Virendra Rai and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31642 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
                                            2/3




          he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with

          whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if

          Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the petitioner in

          the occurrence, then why 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 further submitted that once an

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

          starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of

          Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation. It is also

          submitted that petitioner earlier also in similar manner came to

          be implicated in cases relating to Excise.

                   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 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. 55,000/- (Rupees Fifty-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 Chiraiya P.S. Case
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31642 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
                                                          3/3




                        No. 89 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under

                        Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                                 7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

                        shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

                        event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than

                        eleven cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the

                        purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent

                        before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order

                        shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that

                        petitioner has antecedent of eleven cases in that event the

                        provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         t