Patna High Court
Rohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, granting it subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Rohit Kumar sought anticipatory bail after the police alleged his involvement in the sale of illicit liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act. The FIR was based on a secret tip, leading to a raid that recovered 52.5 litres of foreign liquor from an open field and 6.75 litres from the petitioner’s shop, after which he allegedly fled. The petitioner contended that the field did not belong to him, no independent witness testified to the seizure, and he had no prior similar convictions, though one case was pending. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, applying Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., granted anticipatory bail subject to stringent conditions, including surety, personal appearance, and regular reporting to the Superintendent of Police. The order directed the petitioner to appear before the police periodically and allowed bail cancellation if conditions were breached.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from an open field and the petitioner’s shop suffices to deny bail.
- Whether the absence of an independent witness and lack of prior similar convictions justify granting bail.
- What conditions may be imposed on anticipatory bail in such cases.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act
- illicit liquor
- bail conditions
- seizure
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85586 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2025 Thana- BARHAT District- Jamui
======================================================
Rohit Kumar S/O Nandlal Bhagat @ Bholu Bhagat @ Bhelu Bhagat R/O Vill
- Bhaluka,P.S - Barhat,Dist- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Barhat P.S. Case No. 138 of 2025 registered for the offences
under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act.
3. As per the F.I.R., the informant received secret
information that the petitioner was engaged in the sale of illicit
liquor. On receiving such information, a raid was conducted and
a total quantity of 52.500 litres of foreign liquor was allegedly
recovered from a field situated near the old poultry farm.
Subsequent thereto, the police conducted a raid in the shop of
the petitioner from where 6.750 litres of liquor was allegedly
recovered and the petitioner is alleged to have fled from the
spot.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85586 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated
in the present case and that no recovery, as alleged, has been
made from his conscious possession. It has further been
submitted that the alleged recovery of 52.50 litres of liquor was
made from a field near the old poultry farm, which neither
belongs to the petitioner nor is in his possession and is
admittedly an open and accessible place by all. It has next been
submitted that there is no independent witness to the alleged
search and seizure. It has lastly been submitted that the
petitioner does not carry any criminal antecedent of similar
nature, though there is one case pending against him.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and
circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender
before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Barhat P.S. Case
No. 138 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85586 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with
corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to
the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
close relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or
in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of
the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the
Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has
concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below
shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be
delayed for purpose of or in the name of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85586 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
verification.
(vi) In view of the antecedents of the petitioner,
the petitioner is directed to appear before the
Superintendent of Police, Jamui within fifteen
days of his release with a copy of this order and
every two weeks thereafter for the next nine
months. The conduct of the petitioner will be
kept under watch in this period by the
Superintendent of Police concerned and if it is
found wanting in any respect, a report shall be
made to the court concerned by him to initiate a
proceeding for cancellation of bail for reasons
of misuse of bail. After reporting to the
Superintendent of Police, a certificate will be
filed by the petitioner before the court
concerned.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
aditya/-
U
Checking your session…