Patna High Court
Janakdhari Kumar @ Janakdhari @ Janjali RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Janakdhari Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case where 1,360 litres of liquor were seized from a Tata Ace vehicle, alleged to be in violation of Sections 274 and 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He contended that his name was only mentioned by a co‑accused, that he was neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicle, and that no prima facie case existed against him, also noting a lack of compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s four prior criminal convictions of a similar nature. The High Court, considering the antecedents and the circumstances, refused to grant anticipatory bail, but directed that if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks, a regular bail application may be entertained by the lower court. The order thus denied anticipatory bail while leaving open the possibility of regular bail upon surrender.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given his prior criminal antecedents and the alleged involvement in liquor smuggling.
- Whether the prosecution has made a prima facie case against the petitioner under the cited statutory provisions.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 274, 275
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- liquor smuggling
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.890 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-993 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Janakdhari Kumar @ Janakdhari @ Janjali Ray Son of Ramjanam Ray
Resident of Village - Dharmapur, Diwantok, P.S.- Ganga Bridge, District -
Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Mahua PS Case no. 993 of 2025 instituted for the offences
under Sections 274 & 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that total 1360
litres of liquor was recovered from Tata Ace vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
The name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of
disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person. Petitioner
is neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicle in question.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.890 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner is neither the
owner nor the driver of the vehicle. The petitioner has got no
concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. The petitioner has
four criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Section 103
of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Learned
counsel for the petitioner, therefore, contends that prima-facie
no case is made out against the petitioner.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that
petitioner bears four criminal antecedent/s, that too of the
similar nature, hence, petitioner does not deserve the privilege
of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and specifically taking into account the fact that
petitioner bears four criminal antecedent/s, that too of the
similar nature, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory
bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner is hereby rejected.
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the
court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays
for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court
below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.890 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
order of this Court.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…