Md. NaushadversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47122 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2026 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Naushad S/o Md Khurshid R/o Village - Jagdishpur, P.S. -
                 Muffasil(Bunyadganj), Dist. - Gaya Jee.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Sheikh Arkan Ahmad
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Mohammed Arif
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-07-2026               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 318(4),

                   112(2), 61(1) of BNS, Section 11 of Gambling Act and Section

                   30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 1.8 litres of liquor along with 21 motorcycles and a

                   scooty and a bicycle.

                             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 even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47122 of 2026(2) dt.10-07-2026
                                            2/3




          and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner

          of one of the seized motorcycles. 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 further submitted that

          petitioner was completely unaware that his friend would misuse

          the vehicle in the manner as alleged.

                   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.

          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 Muffasil

          P.S. Case No. 144 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 shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and

          in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47122 of 2026(2) dt.10-07-2026
                                                          3/3




                        than one case 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 one

                        case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be

                        confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T