Sunil Patel v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4071 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2025 Thana- RAMPUR HARI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Sunil Patel S/O Gauri Shankar Patel R/O Village- Gousaipur, Maltoli, P.S.- Rampur Hari, District-Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Md Shadab Alam Wazdi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-03-2026 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 Sections 30(a), 32(ii) and 41(i) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1230 litres of raw spirit from a truck. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if the Chowkidar was aware about the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4071 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026 2/3 involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.

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. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 Rampur Hari P.S. Case No. 213 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4071 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026 3/3 in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than four cases 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 has antecedent of four cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

8.

At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that inadvertently at para-1 and in the prayer portion of the anticipatory bail application, it has been recorded that Rampur Hari PS Case No. 213 of 2015, when it ought to have been Rampur Hari PS Case No. 213 of 2025, thus seeks permission to rectify the same.

9.

Permission is accorded.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T