Rajesh raiversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31872 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2026 Thana- CHIRAIYA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Rajesh Rai Son of Late Ram Ayodhya Rai @ Ram Ayodhya Ray Resident of
                 Village- Motnaj, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Manoj Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman
                 ======================================================
                 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of 14 cases, out of which, 13 cases are

                   under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 322.2 litres

                   of liquor from a place in front of the house of Birendra, which is

                   adjacent to the house of petitioner. It is next submitted that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31872 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
                                            2/3




          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 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

          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. It

          is further submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier also

          came to be implicated in cases relating to excise.

                       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.70,000/- (Rupees seventy 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 No.137/2026, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31872 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
                                                         3/3




                       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 14

                       cases, 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 14

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

                       confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T