Santosh Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15323 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-356 Year-2025 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Santosh Rai son of Kishundev Rai Resident of village -Naraha PS -Rajepur District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ujjwal Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard Mr. Ujjwal Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajepur P.S. Case No. 356 of 2025 for the offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act lodged on 28.12.2025 by the informant, Abhishek Kumar Upadhyay.
3. The allegation in the FIR is that on secret information, motorcycle was intercepted and there is recovery/seizure of 34.560 liters of foreign liquor. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he do not have criminal antecedent nor the motorcycle belongs to him but Ravindra Rai who was apprehended, gave his name.
2/4
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 1089 wherein it has been held that an application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar under Section 76(2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made out.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the person apprehended, named him.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as also that nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession nor he has any criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. If, however, it is found that contrary to the statement made in paragraph-3, the petitioner has criminal antecedent, the present order shall become infructuous.
9. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
3/4 receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Court-3, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Rajepur P.S. Case No. 356 of 2025 subject to the following conditions: (i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the Police Station as and when required for cooperating in the investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for six months to mark his attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds; (v) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
4/4 failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T