Kanchan RaiversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44357 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-208 Year-2026 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Kanchan Rai S/O Dilip Rai R/O Vill.- Saguni, P.s.- Taraiya, Dist.- Saran at
                 Chapra.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Umanath Mishra
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   07-07-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 450 litres of spirit from the Palani of

                   Lal Babu Rai.          It is next submitted that petitioner was not

                   arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his

                   conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from palani

                   of Lal Babu Rai, with whom petitioner has no concern or

                   relation and he came to be implicated at the instance of local

                   person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44357 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
                                            2/3




          of the petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR, which casts

          aspersion on the case of the prosecution when petitioner has not

          been implicated based on secret information. It is also submitted

          that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise,

          the police starts implicating mechanically either through

          chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation.

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

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, 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.20,000/- (Rupees twenty 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 Panapur P.S. Case No.208/2026, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the

          B.N.S.S.

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

          shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44357 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
                                                         3/3




                       four cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner

                       had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

                       provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

                       on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of four

                       cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                       be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T