Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42649 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2026 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR District-
                                                         Saharsa
                 ======================================================
                 Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar S/o Sri Kailash Prasad R/o Vill. - Bharosa,
                 P.S. - Nawada, Dist. - Nawada.
                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                   ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-07-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   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

                   41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,

                   2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 3801.6 litres of liquor from a Hyva Truck and a

                   Bolero Pick-Up Vehicle was 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. It is further submitted

                   that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that he is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42649 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                            2/3




          owner of the Hyva Truck. It is next submitted that no prudent

          person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence

          and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence,

          would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was

          completely unaware that Vijay Tiwari would misuse the vehicle

          in the manner as alleged with whom petitioner had entered into

          an agreement for plying the vehicle as would manifest from the

          agreement dated 09.02.2026 (Annexure-2 to the anticipatory

          bail application).

                       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.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 Simri Bakhtiyarpur

          P.S. Case No. 69 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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42649 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                                       3/3




                     Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner

                     and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T