Santosh RaiversusThe State Of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35981 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2026 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Santosh Rai S/O Late Sukhnandan Rai R/O Vill.- Balwa Tola, P.s- Doriganj,
                 District- Saran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rajesh Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   01-07-2026                          Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                  2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Doriganj P.S. Case No. 156 of 2026 registered

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 41 of

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                   3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 22.03.26,

                   police received secret information about illegal foreign liquor

                   trade near Doriganj Ghat during a raid some suspected try to

                   fled away, but one persons Vikash @ Vinit Kumar Rai was

                   caught police seized 48.24 liters of illicit liquor and three

                   vehicle. during interrogation he reveale3d that the liquor was

                   purchased from Santosh Rai, who had more struck hidden near

                   Mashan Ghat. Police conducted another raid and recovered 470
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35981 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                            2/4




          liters liquor from bushes near Santosh's house. Two persons fled

          but one was identified as Santosh Rai.

                          4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case on the

          basis of disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person,

          namely, Vikash @ Vinit Kumar Rai. He further submits that it

          appears from the F.I.R and seizure list that nothing has been

          recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and

          except the aforesaid nothing has come during the investigation

          to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present

          occurrence.

                       5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

          petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of

          the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the

          pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable. Apart from that

          petitioner has antecedent of three cases other than the present

          case but fairly submits that the cases which are pending against

          the petitioner are not pertaining to excise cases

                       6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full

          Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar

          reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35981 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                            3/4




          down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on

          behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant

          of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of

          counsel for the petitioner.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been

          recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and the

          name of the petitioner has transpired on the basis of disclosure

          made by apprehended co-accused person, namely, Vikash @

          Vinit Kumar Rai, let the petitioner, above named, in the event

          of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period

          of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released

          on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          the learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Saran at Chhapra

          in connection with Doriganj P.S. Case No. 156 of 2026, subject

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

          of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-

                          1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall

          be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the

          court and shall remain physically present as directed by the

          court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without

          sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35981 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                                       4/4




                     below.

                                     2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                     witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

                     for cancellation of bail.

                                    3. And further condition that the court below shall

                     verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                     any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                     criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                     cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                     acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                     shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                     verification.



                                            (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-

U      T