Munna Kumar @ Munna Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28069 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2026 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran ====================================================== Munna Kumar @ Munna Choudhary S/o Vyash Choudhary R/O VillKarhameya, PS- Bettiah Mufassil, Distt-West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-04-2026

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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 52 liters of liquor along with 250 liters of Mahua Pass at the spot and the said recovery was made from the house of the petitioner and Bihari Choudhary.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28069 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 2/3 with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge and after amendment in the excise act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to 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 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. 5000/- (Rupees 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 Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 139 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28069 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 3/3

7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case 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 one case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T