Dinesh PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90766 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-235 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Kaimur
                                                         (Bhabua)
                 ======================================================
                 Dinesh Paswan S/O Lalmuni Paswan Resident of Village- Tori, P.S-
                 Bhagwanpur, Dist.- Kaimur at Bhabua.
                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Umanath Mishra, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-01-2026                  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 Sections 30(a) and

                   30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 30 litres of liquor from the bank of

                   the river along with 1500 litres of semi prepared Mahua which

                   was destroyed at the spot.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   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.90766 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                            2/3




          and is accessible to public at large. It is next submitted that

          petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the

          Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if Chawkidar was aware

          of the involvement of the petitioner 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

          also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case

          relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically

          without holding a proper investigation of the case.

                       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, let 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

          Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 235 of 2025, subject to the

          conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482

          of the BNSS.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90766 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                                  7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial

                     court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if

                     it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case,

                     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 one case in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T