Patna High Court
CR. MISC./51699/2026 of Sajan Chaudhary @ Sajan Kumar Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar on 29 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51699 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-435 Year-2026 Thana- BHAGWAN BAZAR District- Saran ====================================================== 1. Sajan Chaudhary @ Sajan Kumar Chaudhary Son of Lalan Chaudhary Resident of Village- Gudri
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51699 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-435 Year-2026 Thana- BHAGWAN BAZAR District- Saran ======================================================
1.
Sajan Chaudhary @ Sajan Kumar Chaudhary Son of Lalan Chaudhary Resident of Village- Gudri Bazar, P.S.- Bhagwan Bazar, District- Saran
2.
Rajan Chaudhary Son of Lalan Chaudhary Resident of Village- Gudri Bazar, P.S.- Bhagwan Bazar, District- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr.Ranjit Kumar Thakur
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Akbar Ali
======================================================
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
29-07-2026
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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 19 litres of liquor from PCC road outside the house of the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51699 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioners but then is adjacent to their house and they came to be implicated at the instance of local person but then it is submitted that if local people was aware about the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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 for the petitioners, 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. 5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Bhagwan Bazar P.S. Case No. 435 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51699 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026
than one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of even one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case and petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
Sumit/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T