Ranjay Ray @ Ranjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32044 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2026 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
           1.     Ranjay Ray @ Ranjay Kumar S/o Ram Prawesh Yadav @ Ram Prawesh
                  Ray Resident of village - Kishunpur, ward no. 5, P.S.- Piprakothi, Distt.-
                  East Champaran
           2.    Sanjay Ray @ Sanjay Kumar S/o Ram Prawesh Yadav @ Ram Prawesh Ray
                 Resident of village - Kishunpur, ward no. 5, P.S.- Piprakothi, Distt.- 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.Shyam Bihari Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-05-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275,

                   110, 123 of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of three cases out of which two

                   cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 2 has

                   antecedent of two cases out of which one case is under the

                   Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 26 litres of spirit

                   from the house of the petitioners and one motorcycle, one

                   scooty and Rs. 6,59,485/- were also seized from the house of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32044 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioners.

                   4.     Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

          petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

          recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner

          of the seized vehicles and the house in question is a joint family

          property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it were

          petitioners who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor

          kept in the house was within knowledge of the petitioners and

          they came to be implicated at the instance of local people, but

          then the name of the person, who disclosed the name of the

          petitioners, is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts an aspersion

          on the case of the prosecution, when petitioners have not been

          implicated based on secret information. 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.

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

          anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

                   6.     Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the

          event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32044 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                                          3/3




                        furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand)

                        each 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 Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 114 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 petitioners and in the

                        event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more

                        than three cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than

                        two cases then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the

                        purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their

                        antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory

                        bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner

                        who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but

                        after verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent

                        of three cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of two cases in

                        that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be

                        confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T