Bhola KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39074 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2026 Thana- Vasudevpur District- Munger
                 ======================================================
                 Bhola Kumar Son of Late Suresh Yadav @ Late Natu Yadav Resident of
                 village - Near Durga Mandir, Sherpur, P.O. and P.S.- Basdeopur, District -
                 Munger - 811202

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Hemant Kumar Karn, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Parijat Karan, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Aman Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-07-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                   2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Basudeopur P.S. Case No. 20 of 2026 registered

                   for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar

                   Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                  3. Recovery is of 439.89 liters of illegal foreign

                   liquor.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He

                   further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that nothing has

                   been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39074 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                            2/4




          rather the recovery has been made from the place of occurrence.

          Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that name of the

          petitioner has transpired in the present case on the basis of

          disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person, namely,

          Rahul Kumar and he has stated that petitioner has fled away

          from the place of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner

          next submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the

          present case as he was not present at the place of 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 one case other than the present case

          but fairly submits that petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.

                          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

          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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39074 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                            3/4




                          7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been

          recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and name

          of the petitioner has transpired in the present case on the basis of

          disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person, namely,

          Rahul Kumar, 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 Judge, Excise-II, Munger in

          connection with Basudeopur P.S. Case No. 20 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

          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.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39074 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                                       4/4




                                  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