Patna High Court

Kanchan Kumar @ Kanchan RayversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond, sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Summary

The petitioner, Kanchan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being named in an FIR for a range of offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016. He contended that he has a clean record, was falsely implicated by the informant, and that the FIR does not specify any overt act or the quantity of liquor involved. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the charges. The Court examined the submissions and, noting the lack of specific incriminating details against the petitioner, granted anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bail bond with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The order directs the petitioner to surrender to the trial court within six weeks if arrested.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
Whether the FIR discloses a specific overt act against the petitioner justifying denial of bail
Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and clean antecedent warrants bail

Legislation cited

Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 45
Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 337, 338, 34, 341, 353, 427, 431

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 438
false implication
FIR
Indian Penal Code
Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act
bail bond
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79935 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2018 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Kanchan Kumar @ Kanchan Ray Son of Ram Pravesh Rai Resident of
                 Village - Jethuli, Police Station - Nadi, District - Patna.
                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                             ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 147,

                   148, 149, 353, 337, 338, 427, 431 and 34 of the Indian Penal

                   Code as well as Sections 30(a) and 45 of Bihar Prohibition &

                   Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that the FIR named accused persons including the

                   petitioner along with 30 unknown accused attacked the raiding

                   party with pellet, Lathi, Danda due to which raiding party

                   became injured and one Ajit Kumar sustained grievous injury.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79935 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
                                                           2/2




                         informant. It is next submitted that the case has been instituted

                         under the Excise Act in order to ensure that anticipatory bail is

                         not granted to the accused person. It is further submitted that

                         FIR does not disclose the quantity of liquor. It is further

                         submitted that from perusal of the allegations, as alleged in the

                         FIR, it would manifest that no specific overt act is alleged

                         against the petitioner.

                                      5. Learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail

                         application.

                                      6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                         counsel for the petitioner, let petitioner, above-named, in the

                         event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court

                         within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

                         anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

                         Ten Thousand) 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.264 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under

                         Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.


                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Sanjay/-

U          T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.