Patna High Court
CR. MISC./48684/2026 of Mangal Ram @ Pritam Kumar Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar on 16 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48684 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-308 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Rohtas ====================================================== Mangal Ram @ Pritam Kumar Ranjan S/O Bhanu Pratap Ram R/O Village- Lashkariganj, P.S.- Sasaram
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48684 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-308 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Rohtas ======================================================
Mangal Ram @ Pritam Kumar Ranjan S/O Bhanu Pratap Ram R/O Village- Lashkariganj, P.S.- Sasaram Town, Dist.- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Madan Kumar
======================================================
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
16-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner 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 petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 26.385 liters of liquor from house of Shukar Ram.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a house which does not belong to the petitioner and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48684 of 2026(2) dt.16-07-2026
Shukar Ram in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that petitioner is son-in- law of Shukar Ram and no father-in-law would implicate his own son-in-law until pressurized.
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. 10000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Excise Case No.1389 of 2026, FIR No. 308 of 2026 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 two cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48684 of 2026(2) dt.16-07-2026
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
Rishabh/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T