Arun Singh @ Babloo Singh @ Arun Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43295 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2026 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Arun Singh @ Babloo Singh @ Arun Kumar Singh S/O Chhabi Nath Singh
                 @ Chhavinath Singh R/V Chainpur, P.S- Mashrakh, Dist.-Saran.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Sanjeet Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi
                 ======================================================
                 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 Section 111 of BNS

                   and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases

                   are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 180

                   litres of spirit along with 457.92 litres of liquor from water plant

                   of the petitioner.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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 457.92 litres of liquor was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43295 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                            2/3




          recovered from his water plant. It is next submitted that no

          prudent person would use his own plant for committing an

          occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and

          hence would get implicated and he came to be implicated based

          on 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 starts

          implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar,

          local person, confessional statement or secret information

          without holding a proper investigation.

                   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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event

          of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a

          period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional

          anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees

          Fifteen 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 Mashrakh P.S. Case

          No. 344 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under

          Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                   7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43295 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                                          3/3




                        shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

                        event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than

                        three cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the

                        purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent

                        before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order

                        shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that

                        petitioner has antecedent of three cases in that event the

                        provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T