Sujit Kumar @ Faram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27177 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1301 Year-2025 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== Sujit Kumar @ Faram S/O Ashok Yadav Resident of village- Murkatta, Gandhar, PS- Mufassil, District-Gaya jee ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-04-2026
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 six cases out of which three cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 120 litres of liquor from an auto near Falgu 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. It is further submitted submitted that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to be implicated at the instance
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27177 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026 2/3 of the Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is further 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 next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information 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.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty 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 Gaya Mufassil P.S. Case No. 1301 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27177 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026 3/3
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than six 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 six cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T