IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56626 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2025 Thana- KUCHAIKOTE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Viresh Kumar Yadav @ Viresh Yadav Son of Late Nathu Yadav Resident of village - Chhahun, P.S.- Turkpatti, District - Kushinagar (Uttar Pradesh). ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Shubhangi Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 2 07-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 402 of 2025 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 . 3. The prosecution allegation, in short, is that total 511.275 liters liquor was recovered from two vehicles. Out of which 207 liters of liquor was recovered from Car. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner has got three criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the name of the petitioner has Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56626 of 2026(2) dt.07-08-2026 2/2 transpired as being owner of the said vehicle. The petitioner has got no knowledge and concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. There is no compliance of Section 103 of B.N.S.S., 2023. Co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Bench vide order dated 03.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 82777 of 2025. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents, therefore, he does not deserve anticipatory bail. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 7. The prayer is rejected. sukriti/- (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) U T