Sudhir Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76022 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-517 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.
Sudhir Kumar S/O Vijay Yadav R/O Village- Ramdiha, P.S.- Rajauli, District- Nawada 2.
Nitish Kumar S/O Sarju Singh @ Saryu Singh R/O Village- Vishanpur, P.S.- Tilaiya, District- Kodarma (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-11-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 4000 litres of fermented Jawa Mahua along with 35 litres of liquor from a bush in a forest area and 10 litres of liquor from possession of co-accused, namely, Babli Devi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76022 of 2025(2) dt.18-11-2025 2/3 recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioners and is accessible to public at large. It is next submitted that petitioners do not have any relation with Babli Devi and they came to be implicated at the instance of the local persons but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioners is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioners admittedly are persons with clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, let 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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Nawada P.S. Case No. 517 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 petitioners and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76022 of 2025(2) dt.18-11-2025 3/3 if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their 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 petitioners are persons with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T