Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36964 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2026 Thana- HATHIDAH District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Sonu Kumar S/O Rom Sogarath Singh @ Ram Sogarath Singh R/O VillageNaya Gaon, Chitrapur (Chhitraur), P.S- Begusarai (Matihani), Distt.- Begusarai.
2.
Hira Kumar S/O Divakar Ray R/O Village- Chatra, Mansi, P.S.- Mansi, Dist.- Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The state of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Sucheta Yadav, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-06-2026
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 78 litres of liquor from two vehicles.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious possession. It is further submitted that petitioners came to be implicated based on the fact that they are owner of the seized vehicle. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36964 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 2/3 submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence, would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioners were completely unaware that their friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot. It is submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioners, let 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 Hathidah P.S. Case No. 19 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36964 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 3/3
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of more than one case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioners have antecedent of only one case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T