Ghanshyam Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3270 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-622 Year-2025 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.
Ghanshyam Kumar S/o Krishna Prasad Rastogi R/o vill - Jafarpur, P.S.- Paroo, Distt.- Muzaffarpur 2.
Kanhaiya Kumar S/o Krishna Prasad Rastogi R/o vill - Jafarpur, P.S.- Paroo, Distt.- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Priyesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 28.440 liters of liquor from house of the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3270 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 2/3 with certainty that it were petitioners who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within their 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 and they came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar and local person, but then it is submitted that if Chowkidar and local person were aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence then why they did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR which 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 petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their 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) each 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 Paroo P.S. Case No. 622 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3270 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 3/3
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event if it is found that any of the petitioners have antecedent of even one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners, based on instruction, undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs. 1500/- with Lawyers' Association, Patna High Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T