Ganesh Sahni @ KutumaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32872 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2026 Thana- BAKHARI District- Begusarai
                 ======================================================
                 Ganesh Sahni @ Kutuma S/o Late Anup Sahni @ Akal Sahni R/o vill -
                 Goriyari, P.S.- Bakhri, Distt.- Beugsarai, Bihar

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   14-05-2026                  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

                   petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 7 liters of liquor from house of

                   Rajiya Devi and 70 liters of liquor from a bush beside a pond.

                                4. Learned     counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing

                   was recovered from his conscious possession and even the

                   house from where the liquor was recovered does not belong to

                   him and he has no concern or relation with Rajiya and 70 liters
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32872 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
                                            2/3




          of liquor was recovered from a place which does not belong to

          the petitioner and is accessible to villagers at large and he came

          to be implicated at 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.

                       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 before the learned Trial Court

          within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

          Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.

          15000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 Bakhari

          P.S. Case No. 71 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32872 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
                                                        3/3




                      three 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 three cases only, in that event the

                      provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                              (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T