Patna High Court
Purushottam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Purushottam Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of five litres of codeine cough syrup. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, no contraband was found in his possession, and the informant’s identity was undisclosed in the FIR. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offence involved possession of codeine, which also falls under the NDPS Act, and that the case was properly instituted under the Excise Act. The court examined the submissions and found no sufficient ground to extend anticipatory bail. Consequently, the court rejected the petitioner’s anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the alleged recovery of codeine cough syrup justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- prohibition law
- excise law
- codeine
- NDPS Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65760 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2025 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
Purushottam Kumar S/o Late Vijay Bhagat R/o Ward no. 01, Saur Bazar, P.S.-
Saur Bazar, Distt. - Saharsa, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhiya Kishor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No.98/2025, registered for the
offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and
Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 5 litres of Codeine cough syrup. It is next submitted
that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be
implicated at the instance of local person but then the name of
person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed
in the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65760 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/2
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that
allegation is of recovery of Codeine cough syrup from the house
of the petitioner. It is also submitted that Codeine comes under
the NDPS Act also but then it appears that inadvertently the case
has been instituted under the Excise Act.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.