Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10762/2026bail rejected

Rohit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-24Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10762 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-715 Year-2025 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna ====================================================== Rohit Kumar Son of Laxmi Choudhry @ Lakshmi Chaudhary Resident of Village - Old Kankarbagh, Doctors Colony, P.S.- Kankarbagh, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jay Ram Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nitya Nand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Agamkuan P. S. Case No.715 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases and allegation is of recovery of 169.5 litres of liquor along with arms and cartridges from the house.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a separate FIR has been instituted with respect to allegation relating to arms and cartridges i.e. Agamkuan P. S. Case No. 716 of 2025 and in the said case, the petitioner has been granted the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10762 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026 2/2 privilege of regular bail.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that when petitioner was arrested in Agamkuan P. S. Case No. 716 of 2025, the petitioner ought to have got himself remanded in the instant case also, but then, it appears that the police helped the petitioner by not remanding him in the instant case nor the petitioner brought to the notice of the learned trial Court for recovery of the liquor and arms, two separate FIRs have been instituted and he has been taken in custody with respect to an FIR relating to recovery of arms, as such, it is submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T