IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29049 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2025 Thana- RAHIKA District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1. Arun Singh, S/o- Late Vishundeo Singh, Resident of village- Malangiya, P.S- Rahika District- Madhubani 2. Bambam Singh @ Bambam Kumar, S/o- Arun Singh, Resident of village- Malangiya, P.S- Rahika, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 15-05-2025 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Rahika P.S. Case No. 7 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is of involved in trafficking of illicit wine. The police in course of patrolling intercepted an e-rickshaw and apprehended one Sanjit Mandal. In course of search, total 48 liters Nepali country made liquor was recovered. On the disclosure made by the apprehended Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29049 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/3 person, from a different place 4.5 liters of Nepali country made liquor has further been recovered and in this way total 52.5 liters is said to have been recovered. The apprehended persons also disclosed the name of the petitioners as his accomplice. 4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners taking this Court through the FIR contended that save and except the disclosure made by the apprehended person, there is no material suggesting the complicity of the petitioners in crime. Neither the presence of the petitioners were found at the place of occurrence, nor any incriminating material, much less the illicit wine was recovered from their whereabout. However, only on account of one past criminal antecedent in the name of petitioner no. 2, both the petitioners have been implicated in this case. The petitioners have neither any concern with the e-rickshaw, nor with the recovered illicit wine and moreover, there are various other irregularities in the search and seizure and the witnesses are none else, but the police personnels. This also smacks mala fide. 5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that apart from the materials available on record, the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 clearly prohibits the anticipatory bail. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29049 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 3/3 6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that nothing has been recovered from the whereabout of the petitioners, nor there are material available on record, which attract the provision under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 as also the irregularities as has been shown by the petitioners, let the petitioners above named be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge 2nd cum Special Judge Excise Act Madhubani in connection with Rahika P.S. Case No. 7 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner. supratim/- (Harish Kumar, J) U T