Pintu Kumar @ Maigar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16018 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2026 Thana- NARHATT District- Nawada ====================================================== Pintu Kumar @ Maigar Yadav S/O Baleshwar Yadav R/O Village- Hazidhab, P.S- Narhat, Distt.- Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-04-2026

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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of nine cases, out of which, six cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 82 litres of liquor from a bush near the house of the petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar with whom he is on an

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16018 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 2/3 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 next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.

4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, 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.45,000/- (Rupees forty 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 Narhat P.S. Case No.14/2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16018 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 3/3 event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than nine cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of nine cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T