Patna High Court
Rahul Kumar @ Surya Prakash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the petitioner’s delay and clear identification in CCTV footage outweighed any privilege of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a 2022 case involving alleged extortion, assault, and weapons offenses under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was identified in CCTV footage as part of a group that demanded money and fired at a sweet shop, leading to the FIR. The petitioner contended he was not named in the FIR and that the investigation later implicated him. The State argued that the FIR is dated 2022, the petitioner was clearly identified in the CCTV, and there was no justification for the delay in seeking bail. Considering the delay and the CCTV identification, the Court refused to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender within four weeks for a prompt trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted despite the petitioner’s delay in filing the application.
- Whether identification of the petitioner in CCTV footage precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s initial non-mention in the FIR affects the consideration of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 341, 379, 384, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- delay
- CCTV identification
- extortion
- Indian Penal Code
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30592 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2022 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Rahul Kumar @ Surya Prakash Kumar S/o Rama Shankar Singh @ Ram
Shankar Prasad R/o Parmanandpur, P.S.- Sonepur, Distt.- Chhapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 18-05-2026 Heard Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 01 of 2022 for the offence
registered under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379,
384, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that he runs a sweet shop where named accused came and
demanded extortion. On protest, they came armed variously
and allegation is that Prem Kumar Singh opened fire which hit
the counter of the shop, others also indulged to fight. The further
allegation is of taking away Rs. 45,000/- from the counter. The
Police reached the place, the entire facts recorded in the CCTV
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30592 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
2/2
and accordingly, the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
has not been named in the FIR and later, his role has been
investigated which led to the present case.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the
FIR is of the year 2022, he has been identified in the CCTV
footage and there is nothing on record why he delayed coming
to the Court.
6. Taking into account the delay factor as also
identification in the CCTV footage, this Court is not inclined to
extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail, which is
accordingly rejected.
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders within four
weeks from today, the Court concerned shall take up the matter
and dispose it of preferably on the same day.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.