SAROJ SAHNI @ SAROJ KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44147 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2026 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 SAROJ SAHNI @ SAROJ KUMAR S/o LAKSHMI SAHNI R/o vill -
                 Baijalpur, P.S.- Paru, Distt. - Muzaffarpur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Manjeet Kumar Mishra
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-07-2026               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 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   defect/s as pointed out by the office stands removed.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of

                   recovery of 435 litres of liquor along with 15000 litres of

                   fermented jaggery from bank of Gandak river.

                             5.    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 even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44147 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
                                            2/3




          recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

          and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated

          at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical

          term. It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware about

          the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why he

          did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR,

          which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.

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

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                   7.     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. 10,000/- (Rupees

          Ten 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 Paru P.S. Case No. 56

          of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

          482(2) of the BNSS.

                   8.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

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

          cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44147 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
                                                          3/3




                        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 two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory

                        bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T