Jitendra Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24404 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2026 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Jitendra Chaudhary S/o Chandrika Chaudhary Resident Of VillageBhediharwa, Ps- Nautan, Dist.- West Champaran 2.
Rohit Yadav @ Rameshwar Yadav S/o Madhusudhan Yadav @ Maksudan Yadav Resident Of Village- Bhediharwa, Ps- Nautan, Dist.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ram Kishun Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rabindra Kumar- A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and the allegation is of recovery of 47.7 litres of liquor from a place near bank of a river.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24404 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026 2/3 recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioners and is accessible to public at large and they came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that police in majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. Sri Rabindra Kumar opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24404 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026 3/3 connection with Bairiya P. S. Case No.66 of 2026, 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 petitioners shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event, if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of more than one case and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of more than two cases, then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their 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 no.1 has antecedent of one case only and petitioner no.2 has antecedent two cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T