Umesh Ray @ Lakadi Rai @ Umesh Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38391 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-852 Year-2025 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Umesh Ray @ Lakadi Rai @ Umesh Rai S/o Binda Ray Resident of VillageBariyarpur, Ward No. 37, P.S.- Sitamarhi, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Birendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-06-2026 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases are under the Excise Act and and allegation is of recovery of 315 litres of liquor from a place behind the house of Rita Devi and 19.50 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. 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.38391 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026 2/2 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. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6.

Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 852 of 2025.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T