Ramesh Rai Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90788 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-589 Year-2025 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Ramesh Rai S/o Harish Ray R/o Village - East Nandgola, P.S - Malsalami, District - Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sharda Kumari, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 08-01-2026

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶12

learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1950 litres of liquor from a place near a pit and from two Scooty.

¶15

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 is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and came to be implicated at the instance of the local persons but then it is submitted that the name of the person who disclosed

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90788 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026 2/3

¶17

the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation of the case.

¶18

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

¶19

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let 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.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Malsalami P.S. Case No. 589 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482 of the BNSS.

¶20

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 more than one case,

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90788 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026 3/3

¶22

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 shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

¶23

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶24

Kundan/-

¶25

U T

Ramesh Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Rai 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

Pradyut Samanta Vs The State of Bihar

Vikky Yadav @ Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar @ Vikky Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Basant Yadav @ Vasant Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Babu Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Dinesh Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Yadav Vs The State of Bihar