Mahesh Patel @ Mahesh Kurmi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62021 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.
Mahesh Patel @ Mahesh Kurmi Son of Kodai Patel Resident of Village - Murarpatti, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 2.
Dadan Patel son of Mahesh Patel @ Mahesh Kurmi Resident of Village - Murarpatti, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 3.
Bablu Patel son of Mahesh Patel @ Mahesh Kurmi Resident of Village - Murarpatti, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 4.
Amit Patel Son of Mahesh Patel @ Mahesh Kurmi Resident of Village - Murarpatti, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 5.
Ranjit Patel @ Ranjit Kumar Patel son of Mehesh Patel @ Mahesh Kurmi Resident of Village - Murarpatti, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 6.
Pradeep Patel son of Mahesh Patel @ Mahesh Kurmi Resident of Village - Murarpatti, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-12-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioner no. 4 (Amit Patel) who was arrested during pendency of the anticipatory bail application.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62021 of 2025(3) dt.03-12-2025 2/3
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 have antecedent of five cases and petitioner no. 6 has antecedent of eight cases, as would manifest from supplementary affidavit. It is next submitted that allegation is of recovery of 83.2 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner of the seized motorcycle and they came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is further 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. It is next submitted that investigation in the case against the petitioners is still continuing.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
8. 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62021 of 2025(3) dt.03-12-2025 3/3 40,000/- (Rupees Forty 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 Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 175 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
9. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event if it is found that petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 have antecedent of more than five cases and petitioner no. 6 have antecedent of more than eight cases 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, but after verification if it is found that petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 have antecedent of five cases only and petitioner no. 6 has antecedent of eight cases only in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T