Jaijai Mandal @ Jaijai Kumar @ Jay Jay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8830 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2025 Thana- SHIVAJINAGAR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Jaijai Mandal @ Jaijai Kumar @ Jay Jay Kumar S/o Harekrishan Mahto @ Harikishun Mandal @ Hare Krishna Mahto Resident of Village- Banda, Sarvadih @ Sarbaddi, P.S.- Shivajinagar, District- Samastipur (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Madhav Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-04-2026
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 336(3), 274, 275 and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1330.2 litres of liquor from a Bolero 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8830 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026 2/3 that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to be implicated based on the secret information which is the easiest way to implicate someone. It is next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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 appearing on behalf of 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.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Shivajinagar P.S. Case No. 74 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. However, 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 more than one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8830 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026 3/3 case, it 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 has antecedent of only one case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T