Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9581 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2026 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Ajay Kumar S/o Late Sita Ram Chaudhary Resident of village- Gola Bazar, Parweza Nahar, Police Station- Sonepur, District- Saran 2.

Mithilesh Chaudhary S/o Late Sita Ram Chaudhary Resident of villageGola Bazar, Parweza Nahar, Police Station- Sonepur, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Mili Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-04-2026

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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) 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 103.63 litres of liquor from the house of Babloo Kumar @ Lichi and 78 litres of liquor from a hut near the canal.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious possession. It is further submitted that the house in question is a joint family property, as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9581 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026 2/3 such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the 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. It is next submitted that petitioners came to be implicated based on the confessional statement of their brother, namely, Babloo Kumar @ Lichi in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law. It is also submitted that Babloo Kumar @ Lichi was made to confess the name of the petitioners.

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 appearing on behalf of 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 of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 10 of 2026, subject to the conditions as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9581 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026 3/3 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 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