Surya Kumar Sharma @ Surya Pratik @ Saurya Pratik v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18086 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-346 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== Surya Kumar Sharma @ Surya Pratik @ Saurya Pratik Son of Sanjeev Kumar Sharma Resident of village- Kanti Kasva PS- Kanti District -Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr/s.Preety Kunwar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Iftekhar Mahmood ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2026

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

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases out of which one case is under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 557.730 litres of liquor from house of Rakesh Das and from a Suzuki car.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18086 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 2/3 and petitioner has no concern or relation with Rakesh and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized car. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his driver would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged and even Seema wife of Rakesh disclosed the name of the petitioner, but then, confession in police custody does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that petitioner has antecedent under the Excise Act, as such, the police got him implicated through Seema since his car was apprehended from the place of occurrence.

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

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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18086 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 3/3 Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Motihari Mufassil P. S. Case No.346 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T