Pattu Ram @ Mantu Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90748 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-209 Year-2025 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Pattu Ram @ Mantu Ram S/o Ramprasad Ram R/o Village - Bagahawa, Ward No. 1, P.S - Dhanha, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gyan Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Meena Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-01-2026

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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 69.12 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.

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 is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90748 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026 2/3 of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, secret information or confessional statement without holding a proper investigation of the case.

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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Dhanha P.S. Case No. 209 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482 of the BNSS.

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 more than two cases,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90748 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026 3/3 it 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 has antecedent of only two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T