Sanjay Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11543 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-424 Year-2025 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran ====================================================== Sanjay Ram S/O Shiv Nandan Ram R/O Village- Shitalpur Basti, P.s.- Dighwara, Dist.- Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ====================================================== 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 Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 19 liters of liquor along with 1000 liters of Mahua Pass which was destroyed and 10 liters of liquor along with 500 liters of semi manufactured liquor was also recovered from a sack and destroyed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11543 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026 2/3 recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the 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 also submitted that it appears that the Chowkidar, in order to save the real culprits, falsely implicated the petitioner since petitioner earlier was implicated in a case relating to excise in similar manner.
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. 5000/- (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 Dighwara P.S. Case No. 424 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11543 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026 3/3
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case 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 one case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T