Patna High Court
Rohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Rohit Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 169.5 litres of liquor along with arms and cartridges. He has three prior cases and a separate FIR (Case No. 716 of 2025) concerning the arms, for which he was already granted regular bail. The State opposed the anticipatory bail, arguing that the petitioner should have been remanded in the present case and that granting bail could enable him to abscond. The court considered the risk of absconding and the existence of multiple FIRs. Consequently, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the petitioner's prayer.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act given his prior cases and separate FIRs.
- Whether the risk of the petitioner absconding justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- arms seizure
- criminal procedure
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10762 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-715 Year-2025 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna
======================================================
Rohit Kumar Son of Laxmi Choudhry @ Lakshmi Chaudhary Resident of
Village - Old Kankarbagh, Doctors Colony, P.S.- Kankarbagh, District -
Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jay Ram Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nitya Nand Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in Agamkuan P. S. Case No.715 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of three cases and allegation is of
recovery of 169.5 litres of liquor along with arms and cartridges
from the house.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
a separate FIR has been instituted with respect to allegation
relating to arms and cartridges i.e. Agamkuan P. S. Case No. 716
of 2025 and in the said case, the petitioner has been granted the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10762 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/2
privilege of regular bail.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application and submits that when petitioner was arrested in
Agamkuan P. S. Case No. 716 of 2025, the petitioner ought to
have got himself remanded in the instant case also, but then, it
appears that the police helped the petitioner by not remanding
him in the instant case nor the petitioner brought to the notice of
the learned trial Court for recovery of the liquor and arms, two
separate FIRs have been instituted and he has been taken in
custody with respect to an FIR relating to recovery of arms, as
such, it is submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is
granted, the petitioner may abscond.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail
stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.