Vipin Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7199 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1003 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.
Vipin Kumar S/o Karu @ Rambriksh Mahto Resident of - Loharpura, P.S - Kadirganj, District - Nawada 2.
Karu @ Rambriksh Mahto S/o Late Jagdish Mahto Resident of - Loharpura, P.S - Kadirganj, District - Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amit Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Madhuri Lata, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2026
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 Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 25 litres of liquor from semi construed house of the petitioners along with 600 Kg. of fermented Jawa Mahua which was destroyed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and the house from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7199 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026 2/3 where it is alleged that liquor and fermented Jawa Mahua were seized was under construction, as such, none of the family members was staying in the house. It is further submitted that it appears that someone inimical to the family of the petitioners concealed meager amount of liquor along with Jawa Mahua with an intent to implicate the entire family members. It is next submitted that no prudent person 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 petitioners came to be implicated at the instance of the local person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioners is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioners admittedly are persons with clean antecedent.
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, let the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7199 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026 3/3 of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 1003 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 petitioners and if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their 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 petitioners are persons with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T