Suraj YadavversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48052 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2026 Thana- Mufassil District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Suraj Yadav S/O Daya Shankar Yadav R/O Village- Nanhkumandal Tola, P.S-
                 Muffasil, Distt.- Khagaria.
                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                   ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Krishna Chandra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Nityanand, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 159.75 litres of liquor from seven

                   different vehicles.

                                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 is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and

                   came to be implicated based on the secret information which is

                   the easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48052 of 2026(2) dt.10-07-2026
                                            2/3




          investigation of the case. It is next submitted that once an

          accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start

          implicating mechanically either at the instance of the

          Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation of the case.

          It is also submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier also

          came to be implicated in cases relating to excise.

                       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.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 Khagaria

          Mufassil P.S. Case No. 70 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

          Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48052 of 2026(2) dt.10-07-2026
                                                       3/3




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

                     cases, 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 has antecedent of only two cases in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T