← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11286/2026bail granted

Raghubir Kumar @ Raghuveer Kumar @ Raghuvir Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-17Mr. Justice Sourendra Pandey3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11286 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2026 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Raghubir Kumar @ Raghuveer Kumar @ Raghuvir Kumar, Son of Shambhu Sah, Resident of Village - Baligadh Ward No. 13, P.S.- Runnisaidpur,DistrictSitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 16 of 2026 registered for the offences under Sections 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022.

3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the police received secret information that the petitioner, along with his companions, was bringing liquor. On which a team was constituted and a raid was conducted at Runnisaidpur Ghat and on seeing the police the persons who had assembled in the potato field of Munchun Mandal fled away and on search total 57.75 liters of Royal Stag Superior Whisky was recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11286 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026 2/3 petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case with false and concocted story. It has further been submitted that admittedly the field was of Munchun Mandal, where the recovery is said to have been made, which also is an open place accessible by all. It has next been submitted that it was on account of some local villagers that the petitioner has falsely been implicated and no recovery from his conscious possession or from his house has been made. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner carries one criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, 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 Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 16 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11286 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026 3/3 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 abovementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.

8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) manoj/- U T