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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56315 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2025 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== Deepak Kumar Ray @ Deepak Ray Son of Bir Bahadur Ray @ Birbahadur Resident of Ward No. 02, Bhagwatpur, P.S.- Sarairanjan, Samastipur, 848127, Bihar ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Keshav Bhardwaj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 16-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 118 of 2025, instituted under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act.

3. On getting secret information that petitioner is involved in the trade of illicit liquor, police party reached at the marked place and recovered 260.34 litre foreign liquor from the mud house, kept in plastic bags and cartons.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from possession of the petitioner. Recovery has been made from the mud house, an

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56315 of 2025(3) dt.16-09-2025 2/3 ancestral property of the petitioner, which is accessible to anyone. Petitioner has no concern with the seized liquor. There is no independent witness of the seizure-list. Petitioner has two criminal antecedents. He undertakes to co-operate in the investigation and trial.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner is habitual offender as he has two criminal antecedents of similar nature and involved in illegal business of liquor. On secret information, recovery of illicit liquor has been made from the mud house of the petitioner and escaping the petitioner from there shows that the petitioner is involved in the offence. He further submits that in view of Full Bench decision of this Court rendered in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089 (F.B.), prima facie, case is made out against the petitioner, therefore, the anticipatory bail is not maintainable.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that petitioner has two criminal antecedents of similar nature and on secret information recovery of illicit liquor has been made from his mud house, it cannot be said that there is no prima facie case made out against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56315 of 2025(3) dt.16-09-2025 3/3 anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J.) rakhi/- U T