Rajesh Paswan @ Raghwendra Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28810 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2026 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Rajesh Paswan @ Raghwendra Paswan Son of Kamlesh Paswan Resident of Village -Amathu Durgadih PS- Bikramganj Dist -Rohtas 2.

Dilip Kumar @ Govind Kumar Singh Son of Ramnath Singh Resident of Village - Dhawan, PS- Bikramganj Dist -Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raghunandan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of 7.44 litres of liquor from a Balaji Marriage Complex. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and petitioner no. 2

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28810 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026 2/3 came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of Balaji Marriage Complex. It is further submitted that the said complex is let out on rent in marriage season and for other purposes. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own premises for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated and at the same time shall bring disrepute to his business, it is also submitted that petitioner no. 2 was completely unaware that customer who had booked the marriage hall would misuse the premises in the manner as alleged. It is next submitted that petitioner no. 1 being employee of petitioner no. 2 came to be implicated in a mechanical manner.

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 for the petitioners, 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. 5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 81 of 2026

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28810 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026 3/3 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

7.

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of even once case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T