Dwarika Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27447 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2026 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Dwarika Mukhiya S/o Chunni Mukhiya Resident of Vill. - Basantpur, P.S.- Sathi, Dist. - West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sitesh Kashyap For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Veena Kumari Jaiswal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-04-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act and Sections 274 and 275 of the B.N.S.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 31.17 litres of liquor from a place near bank of Sikrahana river.

4. The 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 alleged recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27447 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026 2/3 and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner 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. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 Chanpatiya P. S. Case No.28 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27447 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026 3/3

7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than three cases, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his 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 has antecedent of three cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T