Rajkishor Purvey @ Rajkishor Purwe v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83513 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-392 Year-2025 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Rajkishor Purvey @ Rajkishor Purwe Son of Mahendra Purve @ Mahindra Purve Resident of village -Majhauli @ Bhanudih PS- Runni Saidpur Distt -Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dwij Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedents of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 58.10 litres of liquor from corner of a government school. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar but then it is submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83513 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026 2/3 that if Chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner 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 also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.

4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge Excise, Court No.-I, Sitamarhi in connection with Runni Saidpur P.S. Case No.392 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

6. The application stands allowed.

7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83513 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026 3/3 accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedents of only two cases, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sanjay/- U T