Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39968 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2025 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali

======================================================

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Singh S/o- Late Vishwanath Singh Resident of Village- Rasulpur PS- Lalganj District- Vaishali

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akbar Ali, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 26-06-2025

¶12

Heard Mr. Shyameshwar Kumar Singh, learned

¶13

counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akbar Ali, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 170 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 14.04.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 317(5), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), 3/5 of B.N.S. and Sections 30(a), 38, 41 of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act.

¶15

Recovery is of 26.235 liters of foreign liquor.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of disclosure made by apprehened coaccused person namely Ajit Kumar @ Bhola Singh. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39968 of 2025(2) dt.26-06-2025 2/4

¶18

nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather recovery has been made from the possession of co-accused Ajit Kumar @ Bhola Singh and he has disclosed that the petitioner was also involved in the present crime in question and except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. Therefore, the recovery cannot be attributed to the petitioner. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr. P.C./ Section 103 of BNSS, 2023 No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶19

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the prearrest bail would not be maintainable. He further submits that the petitioner carries two more cases of similar nature but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in the pending matters.

¶20

This court is aware of the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39968 of 2025(2) dt.26-06-2025 3/4

¶22

reported in 2019(2) P.LJ.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioner.

¶23

Considering the aforesaid facts that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order. be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 1-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Lalganj PS. Case No. 170 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:-

¶24

Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39968 of 2025(2) dt.26-06-2025 4/4

¶26

on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶27

If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶28

And further condition that the 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 above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶29

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶30

Ibrar//-

¶31

U T

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bimla Devi @ Vimla Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ganga Rabidas Vs The State of Bihar

Saraswati Bala @ Madhu Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jainath Rai @ Jainath Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Anish Kumar @ Anish Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar