Ajeet Kumar @ Ajit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44151 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2026 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Ajeet Kumar @ Ajit Kumar Son of Ashok Ray Resident of Village/MohallaBhaisani Tola, P.S. Malsalami, District - Patna 2.

Chottu Kumar Chaurasiya @ Chotu Chaurisiya @ Neeraj Kumar @ Niraj Son of Lakhi Prasad Resident of Village/Mohalla-Bhaisani Tola, P.S. Malsalami, District - Patna 3.

Anuj Kumar S/O Ashok Ray Son of Ashok Ray, resident of Village/ Mohalla -Bhaisani Tola, P.S. Malsalami, District - Patna 4.

Mahesh Kumar Son of Raj Kumar Pandit Resident of Mohalla-Simli Sahadra, P.S. Malsalami, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2026 1.

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

2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Malsalami PS Case No. 144 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act and Sections 8, 20(B) IIB of NDPS Act and Section 112(2) and 318(4) of BNS and Section 11 of Bengal Gambling Act.

3.

The defect as pointed out by the office is hereby ignored.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner nos. 1 and 4 have antecedent of one case and petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44151 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026 2/2 nos. 2 and 3 are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 154 litres of liquor from a sack concealed in a garden behind Shyam Sundar Palace along with 1.610 kg of ganja. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and they came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Jitendra in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. 6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that allegation is of recovery of 1.610 kg of ganja also. It is also submitted that of late in the State of Bihar dry intoxicants are creating havoc for young children. It is further submitted that investigation of the case is in its nascent stages and if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond.

7.

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

8.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T