Md. Samsad Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17041 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-556 Year-2025 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Md. Samsad Ansari S/O Md. Anwar Ansari R/O Village - Rani Pokhar Karanpura, P.S - Mahua, District - Vaishali.

2.

Md. Nazeer Ansari S/O Md. Daud Ansari R/O Village - Kutubpur Dumari, P.S - Mahua, Distt.- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2026

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 petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 564 litres of liquor from five different vehicles.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious possession. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 1 came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized WagonR and petitioner no.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17041 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 2/3 2 is the owner of the seized Splendor Motorcycle. It is further submitted that no prudent person would use their own vehicle for committing an occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against themselves and, hence, would get implicated. It is next submitted that petitioners were completely unaware that their friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of 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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Goraul (Kathara O.P.) P.S. Case No. 556 of 2025, 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. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17041 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 3/3 and if it is found that petitioners have 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 petitioners are persons with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T