CR. MISC./58074/2026 of NITESH KUMAR @ NITESH @ THEKEDAR Vs The State of Bihar on 21 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

21-08-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Kumari Akanksha Rai and learned A.P.P. for the State.

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

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of seven cases out of which four cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 103 litres of liquor from two motorcycles.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of any of the seized motorcycles and he came to be implicated Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58074 of 2026(2) dt.21-08-2026

based on confessional statement of Abhishek in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is further submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.

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, 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. 35,000/- (Rupees Thirty-five 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 Bairiya P.S. Case No. 399 of 2025, 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 petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than seven cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58074 of 2026(2) dt.21-08-2026

the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of seven cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

Sumit/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T