Rajan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51628 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-272 Year-2023 Thana- MEHSI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rajan S/o Mangat Ram @ Mangat Masih R/o Village- Lakhanpur, PostKandwal, PS- Nurpur, Distt.- Kangra (Himachal Pradesh) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramesh Chandra, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-11-2025

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 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 5525.280 litres of liquor from a truck and a motorcycle.

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.51628 of 2025(3) dt.27-11-2025 2/3 owner of the 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 and at the same time will bring disrepute to his business. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Ganpat Singh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot along with Satyapal and Sonu Kumar.

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, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his 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.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 Mehsi P.S. Case No. 272 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51628 of 2025(3) dt.27-11-2025 3/3 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