Mayalal Singh @ Maya Lal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16511 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2026 Thana- CHANDI District- Bhojpur ====================================================== 1.
Mayalal Singh @ Maya Lal Yadav S/o Ram Narayan Singh @ Bhuwar Singh @ Bhuwar Yadav R/o Village - Slaempur, P.S - Chandi, District - Bhojpur 2.
Bala Kumar @ Niranjan Kumar S/o Mor Yadav @ Bhor Yadav R/o Village - Slaempur, P.S - Chandi, District - Bhojpur 3.
Abhishek Kumar S/o Ram Minat Singh @ Ram Minat Yadav R/o Village - Slaempur, P.S - Chandi, District - Bhojpur 4.
Jarasi Kumar @ Ranjan Kumar S/o Mor Yadav @ Bhor Yadav R/o Village - Slaempur, P.S - Chandi, District - Bhojpur 5.
Galli Kumar @ Anand Kumar S/o Ram Laddu Singh @ Ram Laddu Yadav @ Laddu Yadav R/o Village - Slaempur, P.S - Chandi, District - Bhojpur 6.
Pintu Kumar S/o Jitan Yadav R/o Village - Slaempur, P.S - Chandi, District - Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-03-2026
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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1, 3 and 6 have antecedent of three cases under the
2/4 Excise Act, petitioner no. 2 and 4 have antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 5 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 250 litres of liquor from a sack near the bank of Kumhari River.
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 even the alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that petitioners came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. 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, secret information or confessional statement without holding a proper investigation of the case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
3/4
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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) 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 Chandi P.S. Case No. 02 of 2026, 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 petitioners and if it is found that petitioner no. 1, 3 and 6 have antecedent of more than three cases, petitioner no. 2 and 4 have antecedent of more than one case and petitioner no. 5 has 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 petitioner no. 1, 3 and 6 have antecedent of only three cases, petitioner no. 2 and 4 have antecedent of only one case and petitioner no. 5 is a person with clean antecedent in that event
4/4 the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T