Jyotish Kumar @ Bhuya v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38521 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-490 Year-2026 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Jyotish Kumar @ Bhuya S/O Shambhu Mandal R/O Vill.- Ghailarh, ward no. 02, P.S.- Ghailarh, Dist.- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case 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 one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 12 litres of liquor of codeine cough syrup from a place near a bamboo orchard along with a motorcycle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized motorcycle and he came to be implicated at the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38521 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026 2/2 instance of local person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that allegation is of recovery of codeine cough syrup. It is next submitted that off late in the State of Bihar, codeine is being misused by young children for intoxication. It is also submitted that if supply of codeine is not contained by the police perhaps a time would come when an entire generation of young children would get destroyed.
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