CR. MISC./59893/2026 of Sushil Ray @ Sushil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 21 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

21-08-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1840 litres of liquor from a pick- up vehicle.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized pick-up vehicle and he came to be implicated at the instance of the authorities of Prohibition Unit. It is also Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59893 of 2026(2) dt.21-08-2026

submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the Prohibition Unit and the police starts implicating mechanically either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and confessional statement without holding a proper investigation.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

6. 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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 Mahua P. S. Case No.1004 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than three cases, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59893 of 2026(2) dt.21-08-2026

then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedent of three cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

vikash/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T