Santosh Kumar @ Rudal Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32271 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2026 Thana- Mehsoul District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== SANTOSH KUMAR @ RUDAL CHAUDHARY S/O LATE SHIVJI CHAUDHARY R/o vill - Basbariya Chawk, P.S.- Mehsaul, Distt.- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ramesh Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2026
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 Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of 16 cases, out of which, 13 cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 3.3 litres from Nirmala Devi and .720 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he has no concern or relation with Nirmala and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32271 of 2026(4) dt.25-06-2026 2/3 his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was completely unaware that his brother Shyam would misuse his vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, 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.80,000/- (Rupees Eighty 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 Mehsaul P.S. Case No.59 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32271 of 2026(4) dt.25-06-2026 3/3 shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than 16 cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of 16 cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T