Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42649 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2026 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR DistrictSaharsa ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar S/o Sri Kailash Prasad R/o Vill. - Bharosa, P.S. - Nawada, Dist. - Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2026
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) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 3801.6 litres of liquor from a Hyva Truck and a Bolero Pick-Up Vehicle was seized.
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 came to be implicated based on the fact that he is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42649 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026 2/3 owner of the Hyva Truck. It is next 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 petitioner was completely unaware that Vijay Tiwari would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged with whom petitioner had entered into an agreement for plying the vehicle as would manifest from the agreement dated 09.02.2026 (Annexure-2 to the anticipatory bail application).
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Simri Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 69 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42649 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026 3/3 Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T