Raju Yadav @ Raju Rai @ Raju Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53658 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2026 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Raju Yadav @ Raju Rai @ Raju Kumar S/o Devendra Yadav @ Devendra Ray Resident of Village- Naua Chak Bhagwatpur (wrongly mentioned Vill.- Umedpur in F.I.R.), P.S.- Sarairanjan, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anish Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-07-2026

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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of 18 cases, out of which, 16 cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1620 litres of liquor from a pick up vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53658 of 2026(2) dt.31-07-2026 2/3 secret information which is the easiest way to implicate someone. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation. It is also submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier also came to be implicated in cases relating to excise.

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 within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.90,000/- (Rupees Ninety 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 Musrigharari P.S. Case No.81/2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

7. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53658 of 2026(2) dt.31-07-2026 3/3 event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than 18 cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of 18 cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T