Ajay Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22587 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-501 Year-2025 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Ajay Ray S/o Late Autari Rai @ Late Awtari Ray R/o Village - Keota, P.S - Dalsinghsarai, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mahendra Pratap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nand Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-04-2026

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 the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of recovery of 21 litres of liquor from a place near Balan River.

4. 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 the alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22587 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026 2/3 submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that off late the police have started implicating accused with criminal antecedent in cases relating to excise for obvious reasons through the Chawkidar and local person without holding a proper investigation of the case.

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

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 501 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 petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22587 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026 3/3 and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his 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 petitioner has antecedent of only two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T