Bittu SharmaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32971 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2024 Thana- VISHAMBHARPUR District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Bittu Sharma son of Vinod Sharma Resident of village- Khem Matihaniya P.S
                 -Vishambharpur, Dist- Gopalganj

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Naresh Prasad
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Akbar Ali
                 ======================================================
                 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 Sections 30(a) and

                   41 of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of four cases out of which three cases

                   are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 637.6

                   litres of liquor from a car.

                             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

                   of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32971 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
                                            2/3




          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.

                   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.

          20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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

          Vishambarpur P.S. Case No. 76 of 2024,               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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32971 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
                                                          3/3




                        in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more

                        than four 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 four

                        cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                        be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T