Rupak Kumar @ Rupak Kumar RayversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35357 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2026 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Rupak Kumar @ Rupak Kumar Ray S/O Surendra Rai R/O Village- Arnia,
                 Ward No. 5, P.S.- Jandaha, Distt.- Vaishali, Bihar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Akbar Ali
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   25-06-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 6.750 litres of liquor from house of

                   the petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not

                   arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his

                   conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family

                   property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was

                   petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor

                   kept in the house was within his knowledge and after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35357 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
                                            2/3




          amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of

          deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away

          with and he came to be implicated at the instance of local person

          and chowkidar but then it is submitted that it does not appear

          probable that chowkidar and local person would have known

          who had concealed the liquor in the house. It is also submitted

          that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise,

          the police starts implicating mechanically either through

          chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State Mr. Akbar Ali opposes

          the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. 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.10,000/- (Rupees ten 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 Jandaha P.S. Case No.88/2026, subject to the

          conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35357 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
                                                         3/3




                       shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

                       event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than

                       two cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner

                       had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

                       provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

                       on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two

                       cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                       be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T