Ranjeet MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35405 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2025 Thana- PIRI BAZAR District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
                 Ranjeet Mahto S/O Aajo Mahto R/O Village- Khawa Chandra Tola, Khawa
                 Rajpur, P.S. Medni Chowki, Distt.- Lakhisarai.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Sheo Nandan Prasad
                                                   Mr.Rajnish Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Parmanand Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   29-06-2026                   1. Heard     learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his

                   arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 30(a) and 32 of the Excise Act.

                                 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is

                   of recovery of 35 litres of liquor from two motorcycles.

                                 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

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

                   recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be

                   implicated based on the fact that he is owner of one of the

                   seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35405 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
                                            2/3




          use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would

          create evidence against himself and hence, would get

          implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely

          unaware that Rakesh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as

          alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with

          Ankesh Kumar.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail

          application.

                       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 Court below

          within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the

          sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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

          Piribajar P. S. Case No.151 of 2025, subject to the conditions

          laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                       7. The application stands allowed.

                       8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after

          accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify

          the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35405 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
                                                           3/3




                         found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it

                         would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining

                         anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,

                         in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                         not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that

                         petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the

                         provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T