Sameer Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26429 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2025 Thana- MAHINDWARA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Sameer Rai S/O Nawal Rai @ Naval Kishor Rai Resident of villageManikpur @ Maksoodpur, PS- Rampur Hari, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pranav Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-03-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a)(c) and 36 of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of five cases out of which four cases are under the Excise Act as would manifest from the supplementary affidavit and allegation is of recovery of 3890.97 litres of liquor from a secret basement beside kitchen of the house of Rambabu Sahani.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26429 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026 2/3 recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and petitioner has no concern or relation with Rambabu Sahani and came to be implicated based on identification made by informant in light of electric bulb during raid. It is further submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation. It is also submitted that petitioner earlier also came to be implicated in a similar manner in cases relating to Excise. 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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five 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 Mahindwara P.S. Case No. 12 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

7.

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26429 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026 3/3 shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of five cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T