Rampukar Sah @ Rampukar ShahversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91578 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2025 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Rampukar Sah @ Rampukar Shah S/O Jhoti Sah Resident of Village-
                 Kaithwaliya, P.S- Sugauli, District- East Champaran.
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Gulnar Begum, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-01-2026                  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 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 one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 10 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and 25 litres of

                   liquor from the house of the petitioner.

                                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 the seized vehicle and the

                   house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be

                   alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who had kept the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91578 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
                                            2/3




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

          knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year

          2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender

          has been done away with. It is next submitted that petitioner

          came to be implicated based on the secret information which is

          the easiest way to implicate someone 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 Sugauli

          P.S. Case No. 394 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid

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

          it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case,
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91578 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     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