Randhir Kumar @ Munna v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32095 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2026 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Randhir Kumar @ Munna S/O Bankar Singh @ Ram Kishore Singh @ Rajkishor Singh Resident of Village - Bhagwanpur Ratti Ward No 5 / Bhagwanpur Balukram P.S. and Dist.- Vaishali 2.
Rudhir Kumar S/O Bankar Singh @ Ram Kishore Singh @ Rajkishor Singh Resident Of Village - Bhagwanpur Ratti Ward No 5 / Bhagwanpur Balukram P.s. and Dist.- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026
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 the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 540 ml. of liquor from ruined house of Sita Ram Singh.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32095 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 2/3 recovery is from a house which does not belong to the petitioners and petitioners have no concern or relation with Sita Ram Singh. It is further submitted that petitioners came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioners 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.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, let 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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Vaishali P.S. Case No. 145 of 2026, 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.32095 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 3/3
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their 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 petitioners are persons with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T