Patna High Court
Suraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court denied the petitioner's regular bail application.
Summary
Suraj Kumar was arrested in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He had earlier obtained provisional anticipatory bail, but the trial court, after verifying his criminal antecedents, found additional prior offences and refused to accept the bail bond. The petitioner, in custody since 28 March 2026, applied for regular bail. The State opposed, arguing that the petitioner had not approached the court with clean hands and might abscond if released. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant regular bail, noting the concerns about his antecedents, but allowed him to renew his bail prayer after the charge is framed.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted after the denial of provisional anticipatory bail on the ground of undisclosed criminal antecedents
- Whether the petitioner’s conduct in seeking anticipatory bail affects his eligibility for regular bail
- Whether the petitioner poses a flight risk warranting denial of bail pending framing of charge
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- flight risk
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26764 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2026 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Suraj Kumar Son of Late Gulab Sao R/O - Shivpur Tikiyatoli, P.S.-
Sultanganj, Distt.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Arya
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Sultanganj P.S. Case No.10/2026, registered for the offence
punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act.
3. Learned counsel submits that petitioner had earlier
moved before this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr.
Misc. No.10351 of 2026. It is further submitted that petitioner
was granted the privilege of provisional anticipatory bail by an
order dated 16.03.2026 with direction to the learned trial court
to verify his criminal antecedent but on verification of criminal
antecedent, it was found that petitioner had more antecedent
than what was pleaded in Cr. Misc. No.10351/2026, hence his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26764 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
2/2
provisional anticipatory bail bonds was not accepted. It is next
submitted that petitioner is in custody since 28.03.2026.
4. Learned APP Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad opposes
the regular bail application and submits that petitioner had not
approached the Court with clean hands when he had sought
anticipatory bail by filing Cr.Misc. No.10351/2026. It is thus
submitted that if privilege of regular bail is granted, the
petitioner may abscond.
5. After hearing the learned APP, the Court is not
inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
6. The regular bail application of the petitioner is
rejected.
7. However, petitioner would be at liberty to renew
his prayer for bail after framing of charge.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…