Raman Kamat @ Brahmdev Kamat v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7815 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Madhubani ====================================================== Raman Kamat @ Brahmdev Kamat S/o- Awadh Kamat Resident of VillageKhojpur, Police Station- Babubarhi, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md. Soban Asghar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 540 litres of liquor from a Pick-Up.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that inadvertently, at para 8 of the anticipatory bail application, it has been recorded that petitioner is not the owner of the vehicle

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7815 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026 2/3 when the order impugned records that petitioner is owner of the vehicle. It is also submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot.

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 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 Sadar Excise P.S. Case No. 156 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7815 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026 3/3 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T