Hardev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23180 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-453 Year-2025 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

Hardev Kumar S/O Late Ramvilash Das Resident of Village- Kadiyahi, P.SBibhutipur, District- Samastipur. 2.

Amarjeet Kumar @ Amarjeet Kuma S/O Late Ramvilash Das Resident of Village- Kadiyahi, P.S- Bibhutipur, District- Samastipur. 3.

Rajesh Kumar S/O Late Ramvilash Das Resident of Village- Kadiyahi, P.SBibhutipur, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madhav Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-04-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No.453/2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation of recovery of 750 ml of liquor along with two live cartridges from a motorcycle. It is next submitted that informant alleges that on 16.11.2025 at about 7 P.M., petitioners in an intoxicated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23180 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026 2/2 condition abused and assaulted the son of the informant namely Pankaj Kumar causing injury on head.

4. Learned counsel submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that though it is alleged that petitioners assaulted the son of the informant causing injury on head but then son of the informant has not suffered any injury.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that it is not a case under the Excise Act rather allegation is that petitioners in an intoxicated condition assaulted the son of the informant and a motorcycle was seized from which liquor along with cartridges were also recovered. It is further submitted that the case is in its nascent stages of investigtion.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioners is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T