Prince Kumar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1293 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-564 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Prince Kumar Pandey S/o Dinesh Pandey Resident of Village- Jahanabad Kudra, P.S.- Kudra, District- Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Uday Pratap Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-02-2026 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the defect as pointed out by the office, stands removed. 3.

In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the defect as pointed out by the office is hereby removed.

4.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(i)(iii) and 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Excise Act. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 72.280 litres of liquor from a car. 6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1293 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026 2/3 petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized vehicle. 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 further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged, who also fled from the spot.

7.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

8.

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 trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Kaimur Excise P.S. Case No. 564 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1293 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026 3/3 Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T