Rampukar Singh @ Pukar SinghversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39801 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2026 Thana- OBRA District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Rampukar Singh @ Pukar Singh S/o Late Baijnath Singh R/o Village -
                 Gamharpur, P.S.- Obra, District- Aurangabad
                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Amit Anand, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-06-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.

                   Rabindra Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and

                   30(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,

                   2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 138 litres of liquor along with 350

                   litres of spirit from a place near the godown and two

                   motorcycles were seized.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

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

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39801 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
                                            2/3




          and is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and came to

          be implicated based on the secret information which is the

          easiest way to implicate someone. It is further submitted that

          once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the

          police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the

          Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation of the case.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.5,000/- (Rupees

          Five 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 Obra P.S. Case No.

          173 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under

          Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned

          Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner

          and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39801 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
                                                       3/3




                     case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his

                     antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail

                     application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

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

                     petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T