Sanjiv RajakversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38962 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-772 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Sanjiv Rajak S/O Bhola Rajak R/O Mohalla- Imamganj Mishri Tola Chand
                 Kothi P.S -Town, Dist- Muzaffarpur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Anish Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Arun Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-06-2026                  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(3) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner has antecedent of five cases as would manifest

                   from supplementary affidavit which has been filed and

                   allegation is of recovery of 174.900 litres of liquor from a car.

                                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 the seized car. It

                   is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38962 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
                                            2/3




          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 his driver

          would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who also fled

          from the spot.

                       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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 Excise P. S. Case No.772 of 2026, 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

          found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five cases,
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38962 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
                                                           3/3




                         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 has antecedent of five cases only, in that event,

                         the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed

                         forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T