Kundan Singh @ Kundan Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51081 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2026 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Kundan Singh @ Kundan Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar son of Rambabu Singh Resident of Village- Gopalpur Chaknai PS- Bidupur District -Vaishali 2.
Aditiya Kumar @ Aditya Deo Kumar @ Aditya Dev kumar son of Vishundev Rai @ Bishanu Deo Kumar Resident of Village- Gopalpur Chaknai PS- Bidupur District -Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ravish Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274 and 275 of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of nine cases out of which four cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of 8636.76 liters of liquor from a truck and two pick up vehicles.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51081 of 2026(2) dt.24-07-2026 2/3 petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioners 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.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 45000/- (Rupees Forty Five Thousand) each 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 Bidupur P.S. Case No. 252 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 petitioners and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51081 of 2026(2) dt.24-07-2026 3/3 in the event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more than nine cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect tod the petitioner who had concealed his antecedent, but after verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of nine cases only and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T