Ajay Kumar @ Swaminath Aarybala v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32778 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2026 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Ajay Kumar @ Swaminath Aarybala Son of Late Suresh Ray Resident of Village -Dudhpura, ward 4, PS- Muffasil Distt -Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anish Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mohammad Sufyan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026 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 Sections 30(a), 41(1) and 41(2) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of twelve cases out of which nine cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 4924.8 litres of liquor from a truck.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated at the instance

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32778 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 2/3 of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware about 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. It is further submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation. It is also submitted that petitioner earlier also in similar manner came to be implicated in cases relating to Excise.

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 within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty 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 Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 137 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32778 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 3/3 482(2) of the BNSS.

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 twelve cases 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 twelve cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T