Vijay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91364 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2025 Thana- BIRPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Vijay Kumar S/O Yogendra Mukhiya R/O Village - Ward No. 4, P.S.- Birpur, District- Supaul (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nawaz Shareef, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-01-2026
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 35.4 litres of liquor from the house of Sanjay Kumar.
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 came to be implicated merely for the reason that he is brother of Sanjay Kumar but then it is submitted that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91364 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026 2/3 alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge. It is next submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with home petitioner is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement 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, more so, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Birpur P.S. Case No. 88 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91364 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026 3/3
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 even one case, 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T