Pawan Kumar @ Pawan RayversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60864 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-484 Year-2025 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
           1.     Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Ray S/o Jaykanta Rai R/o Village- Dudnagar Ward
                  No. 11, P.S.- Bidupur, District- Vaishali
           2.     Niraj Kumar @ Niraj Kumar Singh S/o Dinesh Rai @ Dinesh Singh R/o
                  Village- Dudnagar Ward No. 11, P.S.- Bidupur, District- Vaishali
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Ms. Shabina Talat, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   06-01-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioners apprehend their 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 petitioners submits that

                   petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case and petitioner no. 2

                   has antecedent of two cases and all the cases are under the

                   Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 300 litres of liquor

                   from a Tavera.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from their conscious possession. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60864 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
                                            2/3




          submitted that petitioners are not the owner of the seized vehicle

          and came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar but

          then it is submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the

          involvement of petitioners in the occurrence then why he did not

          inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which

          casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. 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, secret information or

          confessional statement without holding a proper investigation of

          the case.

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

          anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners above-named, in

          the event of their 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) each 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

          Bidupur P.S. Case No. 484 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60864 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

                                  7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial

                     court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and

                     if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more than

                     one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than two

                     cases, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their

                     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 no. 1 has antecedent of only one case and petitioner

                     no. 2 has antecedent of only two cases in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T