Randhir Mandal @ Randhir Kumar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43818 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2025 Thana- RAJNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Randhir Mandal @ Randhir Kumar Mandal S/o Satrughan Mandal R/o Village- Balat, PS- Rajnagar, Distt- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 16-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with G.R. No.326 of 2025 arising out of Rajnagar P.S. Case No. 86 of 2025 lodged on 10.03.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 274, 275 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with sections 30(a) & 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, pending in the Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Madhubani.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against six named accused persons including the present petitioner, five unknown persons and one owner of vehicle. Total recovery of 1535.640 litres of illicit liquor has been made which is the subject matter of the present case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43818 of 2025(2) dt.16-07-2025 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and the apprehended accused person has disclosed the name of the petitioner. Counsel submits that ingredients of Excise Act is not made out against the petitioner. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there are four cases pending against him.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that huge quantity of liquor has been recovered in this case. Counsel also submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there are four cases pending against him and all cases are registered under Excise Act and this aspect must be taken into consideration.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T