Arvind Kumar Mehta @ Arvind Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33757 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2026 Thana- RATANPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Arvind Kumar Mehta @ Arvind Mehta S/o Devnarayan Mehta R/V Narpatpatti, P.S. - Ratanpura, Dist. - Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-07-2026 Heard Mr. Pramod Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with S.T. Excise no. 1607 of 2026 arising out of Ratanpura P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026, F.I.R dated 27.02.26 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Recovery is of 252 liters of Nepali Dilwale Sofi desi liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. He further submits that it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33757 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026 2/2 appears from the F.I.R as well as seizure list that altogether 252 liters of Nepali Dilwale Sofi desi liquor has been recovered from the place of occurrence and name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of mobile phone. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries three criminal antecedents other than the present one where two cases are of excise matter and one case is of NDPS matter and on the basis of mobile phone he has been implicated in the present case. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with S.T. Excise no. 1607 of 2026 arising out of Ratanpura P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026 pending in the court of Exclusive Special Judge Excise Court- II, Supaul.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T