Nabi Hasan @ Nabihasan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85090 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-259 Year-2025 Thana- JOKIHAT District- Araria ====================================================== Nabi Hasan @ Nabihasan S/O Budhhu Resident of - Bhagwanpur, P.SJokihat, District - Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Praveen Kumar Agrawal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026

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

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Jokihat P. S. Case No.259 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 132, 262, 303(2),3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 15 litres of cough syrup from a bush behind the house of the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85090 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026 2/3 nothing was recovered from his conscious possession, but then, the recovery was made from a place adjacent to his house and as such, the petitioner came to be implicated based on secret information with an allegation that the police raided his house and apprehended the petitioner, but then, petitioner fled.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that no doubt, the cough syrup containing codeine was found from a place near the house of the petitioner, but then, police had secret information that petitioner was involved in the business of codeine and thus had raided his house and petitioner was even apprehended.

6. It is also submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that it was petitioner who had disclosed his name but taking advantage, the petitioner fled and from a bush adjacent to his house, the codeine was recovered. It is also submitted that it is not a case of liquor rather codeine is alleged to have been recovered which is psychotropic substance and the investigation is continuing.

7. Considering the submissions made by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85090 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026 3/3 learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T