Satyendra Rai @ Satyendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72501 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-780 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Satyendra Rai @ Satyendra Kumar Son of Baleshwar Rai Resident of VillageSabalpur Newal Tola, PS - Sonpur, Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-01-2026
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of recovery of 180.18 litres of liquor from the bathan of the petitioner and Dharmendra Kumar.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and bathan is a place outside the house and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that no prudent person would use his own land/premises for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72501 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026 2/3 create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is next submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local persons but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that it appears that someone inimical to the family concealed the liquor in the bathan of the petitioner which is an open space.
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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) 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 Sonepur P.S. Case No. 780 of 2025, 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.72501 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026 3/3 it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases, 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 has antecedent of only two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T