Baban Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24559 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1240 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Baban Ray Son of Late Gati Ray Resident of village - Rahimpur, P.O. and P.S.- Sonepur, District - Saran (Chapra), Bihar 2.
Sonu Kumar Son of Baban Ray Resident of village - Rahimpur, P.O. and P.S.- Sonepur, District - Saran (Chapra), Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2026
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 Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 200 litres of liquor from a place near bank of Ganga river along with 10,000 litres of Mahua pass which was destroyed. It is next submitted that petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24559 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026 2/3 place which does not belong to the petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large and they came to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is also 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. It is next 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.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, 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.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) 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 Sonepur P.S. Case No.1240/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24559 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026 3/3 the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners and in the event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of more than three cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their antecedent before this court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to those petitioners whose criminal antecedent does not tally but if after verification the criminal antecedent as recorded hereinabove tallies with the petitioners in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T