Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Karan Kumar @ Karn ModversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied to the second petitioner.

Summary

Petitioner Karan Kumar sought to withdraw his pre‑arrest bail petition, which the court allowed, resulting in dismissal of his bail application. The second petitioner, Kundan Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged possession of 1.610 kg of ganja and 154 litres of illicit liquor, offenses under the NDPS Act, Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, BNS Act and Bengal Gambling Act. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing no incriminating material was found on his person and that his name surfaced only during investigation. The State highlighted that the petitioner has nine prior criminal convictions, many of a similar nature, and emphasized the large quantity of contraband recovered. Considering the seriousness of the offenses and the petitioner’s criminal history, the court rejected the anticipatory bail plea.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the second petitioner under the NDPS Act and related statutes
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • NDPS Act
  • illicit liquor
  • criminal antecedents
  • bail petition

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39750 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2026 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna
                 ======================================================
           1.     Karan Kumar @ Karn Mod S/o Khudhi Rai Resident of Mohalla- Bhaisani
                  Tola, PS Malsalami, District- Patna
           2.    Kundan Kumar S/o Ashok Ray @ Ashok Kumar Yadav Resident of
                 Mohalla- Bhaisani Tola, PS Malsalami, District- Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   29-06-2026                    At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners seek

                   permission to withdraw the pre-arrest bail petition of petitioner

                   no. 1.

                                 2. Permission is accorded.

                                 3. This bail petition with respect to petitioner no. 1 is

                   dismissed as withdrawn.

                                 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no. 2 and

                   the State .

                                 5. Petitioner no. 2 apprehends arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 20(B)

                   IIB of NDPS Act and Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise Act and Sections 112(2) and 318(4) of the BNS and 11 of
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39750 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
                                                       2/2




                     Bengal Gambling Act.

                                  6. As per prosecution case , total 1.610 Kg of Ganja

                     and 154 liters of illicit liquor was recovered from the spot.

                                  7. It is submitted that the petitioner is innocent and

                     has falsely been implicated in this case. The name of petitioner

                     transpired during investigation. No incriminating material has

                     been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.

                                  8. Learned counsel for the State submits that

                     petitioner has got 9 criminal antecedents most of them are of

                     similar nature.

                                  9. Considering the huge quantity of recovery and also

                     the fact that petitioner has got 9 criminal antecedents, prayer for

                     anticipatory bail is rejected.



                                           (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Koushik/Sanjay-

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.