Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54835 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2025 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar, aged about 36 years, Gender-Male, Son of Ram Vilas Yadav, Resident of village - Bungaliya, P.S.- Mansi, District - Khagaria, Bihar ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mrs. Seema Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party :
Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mansi P.S. Case No. 53 of 2025 dated 13.03.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 45 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the maize field which is situated behind the hut and 1200 litres of semi-prepared country made liquor was destroyed by police at the place of occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54835 of 2025(2) dt.12-09-2025 2/3 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner was not arrested on the spot. It is submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The name of the petitioner has surfaced in the present case on the basis of secret information but the name of the person who furnished secret information to the informant has not been disclosed in the F.I.R. The hut in question from where the illicit liquor was recovered does not belong to the petitioner rather the same belongs to the coaccused Rakesh Kumar. There is no statutory compliance of Section 103 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence.
It is further submitted that the other co-accused persons, namely, Rakesh Singh, Ranveer Singh and Ram Kumar Singh have already been granted anticipatory bail by a Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 36291 of 2025 vide order dated 25.07.2025. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54835 of 2025(2) dt.12-09-2025 3/3 petitioner, the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge Excise, Khagaria in connection with Mansi P.S. Case No. 53 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with further condition:- (I) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) U.K./- U T