← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34059/2026bail granted

Ram Narayan Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-18Mr. Justice Ritesh Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34059 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2026 Thana- LAUKAHA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Ram Narayan Ram S/o Kailu Ram @ Kailu Mochi R/o Village - Jhanjhari @ Jhajhri, PS - Laukaha, District - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No.41 of 2026, for allegedly having committed offences under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 as well as under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, to the effect that on 27.02.2026, he along with police personnel was on evening patrolling duty. During course of patrolling, the police team at about 20:30 hours reached the place of occurrence, where they saw that 6-7 persons were coming from Nepal side carrying bags on their head. Seeing the police, all the persons managed to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34059 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026 2/3 flee away, however one person was apprehended. The apprehended person disclosed his name as Santosh Kumar Mandal and he also disclosed the name of the persons who have fled away, including the petitioner. Total 155.1 litres of illegal liquor was recovered and a seizure list was also prepared.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence and apart from the confessional statement made by the co-accused, no one identified the petitioner. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from possession of the petitioner and the case of the prosecution is entirely false and fabricated. He further submits that the petitioner has got one criminal antecedent bearing Laukaha P.S. Case No.242 of 2023, registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, in which the petitioner is on bail.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is also an accused in a similar nature of case and he does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, it appears that the petitioner was not arrested at the place of occurrence. His name has transpired on the statement made by co-accused, Santosh Kumar Mandal, who was apprehended by the police at the place of occurrence and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34059 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026 3/3 155.1 litres of illegal liquor was seized from the place of occurrence. The petitioner has got one antecedent of the similar nature of case in which he is on bail.

7. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge (Excise), Jhanjharpur, Madhubani in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No.41 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. with a further condition that:- The learned court concerned shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court concerned shall take steps for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Ritesh Kumar, J.) Sanjay/- U T