Ajay Kumar @ Swaminath AarybalaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32778 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2026 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL District-
                                                        Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Ajay Kumar @ Swaminath Aarybala Son of Late Suresh Ray Resident of
                 Village -Dudhpura, ward 4, PS- Muffasil Distt -Samastipur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Anish Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Mohammad Sufyan
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-05-2026               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 Sections 30(a),

                   41(1) and 41(2) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of twelve cases out of which nine

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

                   4924.8 litres of liquor from a truck.

                             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 is not the owner of

                   the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated at the instance
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32778 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                            2/3




          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. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty 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 Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 137 of

          2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32778 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                                          3/3




                        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

                        twelve 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 twelve cases in that event the

                        provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T