Rakesh Kumar Rai @ Rakesh Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 14 July, 2025

Patna High Court – Orders

Rakesh Kumar Rai @ Rakesh Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 14 July, 2025

Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma

Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38290 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2021 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Rakesh Kumar Rai @ Rakesh Kumar S/O Srinarayan Ray R/O Village-
                 Nandana, PS-Minapur, Distt-Muzaffarpur

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms.Nitu Kumari, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Nityanand, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   14-07-2025

Heard Ms.Nitu Kumari, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr.Nityanand, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

connection with Minapur (Meenapur) P.S.Case No.61 of

2021,FIR dated 01.03.2021 registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 272,273,414,120(B),34 of IPC and

Sections 30(a) and 33 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Recovery is of 107.0 liter of foreign liquor, 06 liter

spirit in three drums, lids of one sack, 25 stickers, empty bottles

and other articles from the house of Arvind Kumar and 54 liter

of foreign liquor from dickey of Xylo vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation as alleged in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38290 of 2025(2) dt.14-07-2025
2/4

FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed

any offence as alleged in the FIR. It appears from the FIR as

well as the seizure list that nothing has been recovered from

conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has

been made from possession of co-accused persons, namely,

Mahi Chand Sahni and Arvind Kumar. The name of the

petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis

of the confessional statement of apprehended co-accuse person,

namely, Arvind Kumar and except the aforesaid, no other cogent

material has come during investigation against the petitioner to

suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present

occurrence. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure

prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C./Section

103 of BNSS, 2023. No case, whatsoever, would be made out

against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

Act.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner referring the

provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition

and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-arrest bail would not

be maintainable.

6. This Court is aware of the decision of the Full
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38290 of 2025(2) dt.14-07-2025
3/4

Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav Vs. State of Bihar

reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 1089. Having regard to the law laid

down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on

behalf of the parties, this Court for the limited purpose of grant

of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of

Counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean

antecedent, nothing has been recovered from conscious

possession of the petitioner and name of the petitioner has been

transpired during investigation on the basis of the confessional

statement of apprehended co-accuse person, namely, Arvind

Kuma, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest

or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty

days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on

furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand) with two

sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

Exclusive Special Judge Excise Court No.1, Muzaffarpur in

connection with Minapur (Meenapur) P.S.Case No.61 of 2021,

subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of

the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023

and with other following conditions:-

(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38290 of 2025(2) dt.14-07-2025
4/4

properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court

and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and

on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

for cancellation of bail.

(III) And, further condition that the court below shall

verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her

criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-

U          T