Janardhan Rai @ Janardhan Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-446 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Janardhan Rai @ Janardhan Ray son of Late Ramgovind Rai @ Govinda Rai Resident of Village- Dahiyawan Uma Nath Mandir Nagar Ps- Nagar Thana, Dist- Saran 2.

Saroj Rai son of Janardhan Rai @ Janardhan Ray Resident of VillageDahiyawan Uma Nath Mandir Nagar Ps- Nagar Thana, Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 446 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 109(1), 132, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Prosecution story, in short, is that on secret information, police chased a boat allegedly carrying illegal liquor, where the accused allegedly fired at the police and were apprehended and recovery of country-made pistols and cartridges was made. It is further alleged that from the boat, 752.600 litres of liquor and other articles were allegedly

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12 of 2026(3) dt.20-02-2026 2/3 recovered and seized.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against these petitioners. No specific overt act is alleged against these petitioners. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioners were not present on the spot, rather their name was disclosed by the apprehended coaccused person. He further contended that the allegation of firing is against co-accused person. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are in custody since 04.12.2025 and one criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

7. Let the petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 446 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12 of 2026(3) dt.20-02-2026 3/3 (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioners.

(II) The petitioners shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T