Brajesh Kumar Singh @ Brajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16577 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-292 Year-2024 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Brajesh Kumar Singh @ Brajesh Kumar S/O Jagdish Singh R/O Vill.- Kosanda, P.S.- Suryapura, Dist.- Rohtas 2.

Anish Kumar @ Anish Raj S/O Bijendra Kushwaha R/O Vill.- Kosanda, P.S.- Suryapura, Dist.- Rohtas 3.

Jay Kumar @ Ajit Kumar S/O Suresh Singh R/O Vill.- Kosanda, P.S.- Suryapura, Dist.- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the allegation is of recovery of 80 litres of liquor from two different places.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16577 of 2025(2) dt.16-04-2025 2/3 recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioners and is accessible to public at large and they came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically at the instance of chaukidar, secret information and confessional statement without holding proper investigation, when admittedly petitioners are persons with clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No.2-cum- Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Suryapura P. S. Case No.292 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16577 of 2025(2) dt.16-04-2025 3/3

7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event, if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T