Dharmendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91582 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2020 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Dharmendra Kumar S/O Bhushan Prasad R/O Village- Badroi, P.S - Masaudhi, District- Patna 2.

Birendra Kumar @ Bilendra Kumar S/O Bhusan Prasad R/O VillageBadroi, P.S - Masaudhi, District- Patna 3.

Ranjit Kumar S/O Surendra Prasad @ Sulendra Prasad @ Suresh Yadav R/O Village- Badroi, P.S - Masaudhi, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Minu Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Meena Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-01-2026

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 Section 30(a) and 30(D) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 205 liters of liquor from a brewery near bank of Paier river at village Bardoi along with two motorcycles.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91582 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 2/3 was recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and they came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar, but then it is submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioners 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 next submitted that even alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large.

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, 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 Masaudhi P.S. Case No. 81 of 2020 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91582 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 3/3 event if it is found that any of the petitioners have antecedent of even one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T