Manish Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2028 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2025 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== Manish Kumar Ray Son of Ram Udesh Ray @ Udesh Ray @ Ramudesh Ray Resident of village - Baruna Rasalpur, Police Station - Sarairanjan, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mahendra Pratap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nityanand, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2026
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 Sections 274 and 275 of the BNS as well as Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 170 litres of spirit along with 2 litres of spurious liquor from the house of Sachin Ray.
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.2028 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026 2/3 and he has no concern or relation with Sachin Ray. It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that off late the police have started implicating accused in excises cases who has antecedent.
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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 202 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2028 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026 3/3 it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases, 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 two cases 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.5,000/- with the Lawyers' Association of the Patna High Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T