Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Raju KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.

Summary

The petitioner, Raju Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 and several sections of the B.N.S., 2023, relating to alleged possession of 510 ml of liquor recovered from another individual's house. The petitioner claimed a clean record and argued that he was falsely implicated merely because he was present at the scene out of curiosity when a ruckus ensued. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted detention. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and comply with the conditions under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order is subject to the petitioner surrendering within six weeks if arrested.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances alleged.
  • Whether the petitioner is likely to flee or tamper with evidence, justifying denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • bail conditions
  • prohibition act
  • excise law
  • criminal procedure
  • false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26340 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-304 Year-2025 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Raju Kumar S/O Late Jagdish Rai @ Jagdish Singh Resident of Village -
                 Fatehjampur, P.S.- Nadi, District - Patna.

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Shyamal Prakash
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Akbar Ali
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-05-2026                    1. 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 and

                   sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 132, 324(4), 324(5), 263, 352,

                   351(2), 351(3) of the B.N.S., 2023.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that 510 Ml. of liquor was recovered from the house of

                   Sanjay Kumar. It is submitted that the informant alleges that

                   when apprehended accused was being brought to the Police

                   Station when his family members and co-villagers gathered and

                   tried to flee the apprehended accused and thus committed
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26340 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
                                                        2/2




                      ruckus but the police managed to bring the apprehended accused

                      to the Police Station. Learned counsel further submits that

                      petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant case being a

                      co-villager. It is also submitted that on hearing alarm he went to

                      the place of occurrence out of him inquisitiveness and came to

                      be implicated.

                                   4. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                      bail.

                                   6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                      counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,

                      above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender 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 Nadi P.S. Case No. 304 of 2025, subject to

                      the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C./u/s

                      482(2) of the B.N.S.S.


                                                (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Ranjeet/-
U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.