IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39902 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-881 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya ====================================================== Akshay Kumar @ Akshay Kumar Ray S/o Jitendra Kumar Resident of Village- Rohan Bigha, P.S.- Belaganj, District- Gaya, ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Biha ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gajendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Pronoti Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 23-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of recovery of 24 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39902 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026 2/3 create evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Kundan would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with Vikash. 5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application. 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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) 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 Gaya Excise P. S. Case No.881 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. 7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39902 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026 3/3 then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39902 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-881 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya ====================================================== Akshay Kumar @ Akshay Kumar Ray S/o Jitendra Kumar Resident of Village- Rohan Bigha, P.S.- Belaganj, District- Gaya, ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Biha ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gajendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Pronoti Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 23-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of recovery of 24 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39902 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026 2/3 create evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Kundan would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with Vikash. 5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application. 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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) 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 Gaya Excise P. S. Case No.881 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. 7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39902 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026 3/3 then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T