Lalbabu Ram @ Lalbabu Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4952 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1069 Year-2025 Thana- SIKARPUR District- West Champaran ====================================================== Lalbabu Ram @ Lalbabu Kumar Ram S/o- Ganesh Ram R/v- Bargajwa PSShikarpur Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Anita Kumari, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-02-2026
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 Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 23.5 litres of liquor from five different places out of which 5.8 litres of liquor is alleged to have been recovered 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 the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4952 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026 2/3 had kept the 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 at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom petitioner is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if the 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 further casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 1069 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4952 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026 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 even 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.2,500/- with the High Court Legal Services Committee, Patna within a period of two weeks from today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T