Patna High Court
CR. MISC./57408/2026 of Rajan Jha @ Rajan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 18 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57408 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-346 Year-2026 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1. Rajan Jha @ Rajan Kumar S/o Sunil Jha @ Sajjan Jha @ Sunil Kumar Jha Resident of
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57408 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-346 Year-2026 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur
======================================================
1.
Rajan Jha @ Rajan Kumar S/o Sunil Jha @ Sajjan Jha @ Sunil Kumar Jha Resident of Village - Bambaiya Harlal, Ward No. 06, Police Station - Dalsinghsarai, District - Samastipur
2.
Awadhesh Kumar @ Awadhesh Mahto S/o Indradev Mahto Resident of Village - Bambaiya Harlal, Ward No. 06, Police Station - Dalsinghsarai, District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Renuka Ratnakar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
18-08-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of six cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 570.33 litres of liquor from an orchard of petitioner no. 1.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57408 of 2026(2) dt.18-08-2026
recovered from their conscious possession. It is asserted and submitted that the orchard from which the alleged recovery of liquor is made does not belong to the petitioner no. 1. It is further 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, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation of the case. It is next submitted that in the instant case also, the petitioners came to be implicated based on the secret information.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, let the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each 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 Dalsinghsarai P.S. Case No. 346 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57408 of 2026(2) dt.18-08-2026
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more than four cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than six cases, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their 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 no. 1 has antecedent of only four cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of only six cases, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
Kundan/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T