Ramashankar RayversusThe State of BIhar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56866 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- JURAWANPUR District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Ramashankar Ray S/o late Kameshwar Ray R/o Village - Virpur, P.S. -
                 Jurawanpur, District - Vaishali

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Bela Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Umesh Lal Verma
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   05-01-2026               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

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 26.5 litres of liquor from hardware shop 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 the shop in

                   question is a joint family business as such it cannot be alleged

                   with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56866 of 2025(3) dt.05-01-2026
                                            2/3




          the shop or the liquor kept in the shop was within his

          knowledge. It is next submitted that no prudent person would

          use his own premises for committing an occurrence and thus

          would create evidence against himself and hence would get

          implicated and at the same time would bring disrepute to the

          business.

                   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

          Jurawanpur P.S. Case No. 119 of 2025, 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

          than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56866 of 2025(3) dt.05-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        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