Patna High Court
CR. MISC./52168/2026 of Jitendra Rai @ Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 24 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52168 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-492 Year-2024 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Jitendra Rai @ Jitendra Kumar S/O Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Rai R/O Vill.- Sabalpur Chaharam, P.s.-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52168 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-492 Year-2024 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ======================================================
Jitendra Rai @ Jitendra Kumar S/O Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Rai R/O Vill.- Sabalpur Chaharam, P.s.- Sonepur, Dist.- Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh No. I
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari
======================================================
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
24-07-2026
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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 816 litres of liquor from a place near Baba Ghat.
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 even alleged recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52168 of 2026(2) dt.24-07-2026
term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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.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 ABP No.2746 of 2026 arising out of Sonepur P. S. Case No.492 of 2024, 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 even one case, then it Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52168 of 2026(2) dt.24-07-2026
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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
vikash/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T