Shailendra Kumar @ Lalan RaiversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3315 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2019 Thana- TEGHRHA District- Begusarai
                 ======================================================
                 Shailendra Kumar @ Lalan Rai Son of Sukhdeo Rai @ Sukhdev Ray
                 Resident of village - Kirtaul, Ward No.- 29, P.S.- Teghra (Teghrha), District -
                 Begusarai.
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Asha Kumari, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   28-01-2026                   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

                   32(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,

                   2018.

                                 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which one case is

                   under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 225.540

                   litres of liquor from a car parked outside the house of the

                   petitioner.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3315 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
                                            2/3




          recovery is from a car which was parked outside his house. It is

          further submitted that petitioner is not the owner of the seized

          vehicle and came to be implicated based on the fact that the car

          was parked near his house. It is next submitted that off late

          police have started implicating accused in excise cases who

          have antecedent without holding a proper investigation of the

          case.

                       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, let 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.15,000/- (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

          Teghra (Teghrha) P.S. Case No. 321 of 2019, subject to the

          conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the

          Cr.P.C./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 if
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3315 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than three

                     cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his

                     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

                     petitioner has antecedent of only three cases in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

                                  8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner

                     based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to

                     deposit an amount of Rs.2,500/- with the Lawyers’ Association

                     of the Patna High Court.


                                                                         (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T