Ravikant PrasadversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85772 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2025 Thana- Excise Arwal District- Jehanabad
                 ======================================================
                 Ravikant Prasad Son of Surendra Prasad Resident of Village- Fatehpur, P.S.-
                 Fatehpur, District- Gaya

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Priya Ranjan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   20-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered

                   for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar

                   Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 98.500 litres of liquor from an Alto car. It is next

                   submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such,

                   nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he

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

                   seized vehicle. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85772 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
                                            2/3




          implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely

          unaware that Alok Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the

          manner as alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail

          application.

                       5. 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 Court below

          within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bond in the

          sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the

          like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of Special

          Judge Excise-2, Jehanabad in connection with Arwal Excise P.S.

          Case No.246 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under

          Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       6. The application stands allowed.

                       7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after

          accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioner shall verify

          the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is

          found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it

          would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining

          anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85772 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
                                                           3/3




                         in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                         not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that

                         petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the

                         provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Sanjay/-

U          T