Ankush KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32048 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2026 Thana- TARARI District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
           1.     Ankush Kumar S/o Late Sunil Ram R/o Village - Sedahan, P.S - Tarari,
                  District - Bhojpur at Ara
           2.    Rishu Kumar S/o Late Sunil Ram R/o Village - Sedahan, P.S - Tarari,
                 District - Bhojpur at Ara
           3.     Raushan Kumar @ Azad @ Azad Chandravanshi S/o Late Sunil Ram R/o
                  Village - Sedahan, P.S - Tarari, District - Bhojpur at Ara
                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                           ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 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 Section 30(a) and

                   30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,

                   2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 53.750 litres of liquor from ice cream factory of

                   petitioner no. 3.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32048 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                            2/3




          recovered from their conscious possession. It is further

          submitted that no prudent person would use his own factory

          premises for committing an occurrence and, thus, would create

          evidence against himself and, hence, would get implicated. It is

          next submitted that petitioners were completely unaware that

          their employee had concealed the liquor within the factory

          premises without the knowledge of the petitioners. It is also

          submitted that no prudent businessman would bring disrepute to

          his business by indulging in act which is against the law and

          they came to be implicated based on the secret information

          which is the easiest way to implicate someone without holding a

          proper investigation of the case.

                       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 appearing on behalf of the petitioners, let 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 furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32048 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                                       3/3




                     Tarari P.S. Case No. 12 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.

                                  7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned

                     Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners

                     and if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one

                     case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their

                     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

                     petitioners are persons with clean antecedent in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T