Jitendra Kumar @ Golu Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37427 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2026 Thana- Panapur District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Jitendra Kumar @ Golu Thakur S/o Ram Ekbal Thakur Resident of VillageArara, P.S.- Panapur Kariyat, District- Muzaffarpur, Mobile No. 8757120173 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar S.K., Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Sharda Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-06-2026

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 the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of six cases out of which one case is under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 461.91 litres of liquor from two different vehicles.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that petitioner is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and came to be implicated at the instance of the local person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37427 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 2/3 petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner has not been implicated based on the secret information. It is also submitted that off late the police have started implicating accused with criminal antecedent in cases relating to liquor for obvious reason without holding a proper investigation.

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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty 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 Panapur Kariyat P.S. Case No. 49 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.

7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than six cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37427 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 3/3 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 petitioner has antecedent of only six cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T