Bhola Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suraj Kumar Tiwari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 19-01-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274 and 275 of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 20 liters of liquor from house of the petitioner.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84585 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026 2/3

¶18

the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge and after amendment in the excise act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with. It is also submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar, but then it is submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner 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.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶20

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. 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 Darpa P.S. Case No. 223 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

¶21

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84585 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026 3/3

¶23

Court 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 would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

¶24

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶25

Rishabh/-

¶26

U T

Bhola Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhola Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aman Singh @ Vivek Vishewer @ Vivek Vs The State of Bihar

Govind Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bouwa Mukhiya @ Baua Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar

Shivpati Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Jaipal Vs The State of Bihar