IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21869 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- Champanagar District- Purnia ====================================================== Vikram Kumar Poddar @ Bikarm Kumar Poddar Son of Sadanand Poddar R/v- Lasanpur Bauri Ps- Dagarua Dist- Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 2 08-04-2026 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Champanagar P.S. Case No.27 of 2026, for the offence punishable under Sections 111(i) /111(ii) of the BNS read with Sections 30(a), 36 and 41(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act pending before the Court of Exclusive Special Judge Excise Court No.1, Purnea. 3. As per the prosecution, the total recovery of 1075.68 litres of illicit liquor have alleged to be made from a Dak Parcel vehicle, which is the subject matter of the present case. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21869 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026 2/2 also submits that petitioner was not present on the place of occurrence and his name has been transpired only on suspicion. Counsel further submits that criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there are two criminal cases pending against him in which he is on bail. He further submits that the recovery has not been made in conscious possession of the petitioner. 5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there are two criminal cases (relating to Excise Act) pending against him and this aspect must be taken into consideration. 6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. Prakashmani/- (Dr. Anshuman, J) U T