Patna High Court
CR. MISC./46524/2026 of Tuntun Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 15 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46524 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2026 Thana- EXCISE SHERGHATI District- Gaya ====================================================== Tuntun Kumar Son of Kedar Yadav Resident of Village- Baida, Tola Mohandih, P.S.- Amas,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46524 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2026 Thana- EXCISE SHERGHATI District- Gaya ======================================================
Tuntun Kumar Son of Kedar Yadav Resident of Village- Baida, Tola Mohandih, P.S.- Amas, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Md. Javed Jafar Khan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, 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
15-07-2026
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 Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 42 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46524 of 2026(2) dt.15-07-2026
and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence, would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Sherghati P.S. Case No. 83 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the 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 petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46524 of 2026(2) dt.15-07-2026
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
Kundan/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T