Lal Babu Rai @ Lalbabu Ray @ Lal Babu Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76968 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2024 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== Lal Babu Rai @ Lalbabu Ray @ Lal Babu Ray Son of Late Girja Ray Resident of Village - Rampur Bathani Tola, Police Station - Garkha, District - Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. B. Kumar, Advocate Mr. Santosh Kumar Yadav, Advocate Mr. Ankur Prakash Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Shaheen Begum, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-11-2025
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, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 30 litres of spirit along with three litres of liquor from two motorcycles.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that he is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76968 of 2025(2) dt.25-11-2025 2/3 owner of one of the seized vehicles. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Sonu Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot along with Ramesh Ram and Pramod Kumar.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Marhowrah P.S. Case No. 124 of 2024, 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 it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76968 of 2025(2) dt.25-11-2025 3/3 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T