Sanjeet Kumar @ Sanjeet Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1681 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-453 Year-2025 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Sanjeet Kumar @ Sanjeet Chaudhary Son of Late Sudama chaudhary Resident of Village- Hanumangarhi PS- Akorhigola District -Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-01-2026

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 Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 3.85 liters of liquor from shop of the petitioner along with 360 ml of liquor from possession of Chandan Kumar.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the shop belongs to the petitioner, but then the shop was given on rent to one Kalandar Singh. It is also submitted that no prudent person

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1681 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026 2/3 would use his own premises for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated, it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his tenant would misuse the shop in the manner as alleged and the police in mechanical manner implicated the petitioner based on confessional statement of Chandan in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.

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, 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 Akorhigola P.S. Case No. 453 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 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 in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1681 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026 3/3 one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if 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) Rishabh/- U T