Patna High Court - Orders
Pappu Ram @ Pappu Chaudhary vs The State Of Bihar on 17 January, 2026
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76550 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2023 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Pappu Ram @ Pappu Chaudhary S/o Mahangu Chaudhary @ Mangu Ram @
Mahangi Chaudhary Resident of Village- Baradih Pul (Bararhi Pool) Musai
Tola, P.S.- Akorhi Gola, District- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-01-20261. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 147, 148, 149, 332, 333, 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 353, 504 of the IPC and Sections 30(a) and 45 of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 40 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76550 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026 2/3 with certainty that it was petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated based on secret information which is the easiest way to implicate someone withing holding a proper investigation, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Akorhigola P.S. Case No. 87 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76550 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026 3/3 event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/-
U T