Binod Kumar Ray @ Binod Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44264 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2026 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna ====================================================== Binod Kumar Ray @ Binod Ray S/O Nawab Ray R/o- Rajpura, P.s- Kaler Dist- Arwal At Present R/o- Lekha Nagar P.s- Danapur, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ghanshyam Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-07-2026 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 37 of the Bihar Excise Act and Section 45 of BNS. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 6.5 litres of liquor from 6th floor of hotel Surya Inn. 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 he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the hotel. It is next submitted that no prudent businessman would use his own premises for committing an occurrence and thus would create

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44264 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026 2/3 evidence against himself and hence would get implicated and at the same time shall bring disrepute to his business. It is further submitted that customers in large number come to the hotel and it might be a possibility that some customer brought the liquor in the hotel and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of apprehended-accused in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.

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 for the petitioner, 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 Khagaul P.S. Case No. 264 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. 7.

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44264 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026 3/3 Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T