Rahul Kumar Jha @ Rahul Jha Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 04-02-2026

¶11

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

¶12

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of 12 cases out of which 8 cases are under the excise act and allegation is of recovery of 1.5liters of liquor from a car.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6734 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/3

¶16

vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated, it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his driver would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot after concealing meager amount of liquor in the car.

¶17

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 428 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

¶19

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6734 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 3/3

¶21

than 12 cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of 12 cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

¶22

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner, based on instruction, undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs. 15000/- with Advocates’ Association, Patna High Court within a period of two weeks from today.

¶23

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶24

Rishabh/-

¶25

U T

Rahul Kumar Jha @ Rahul Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar Jha @ Rahul Jha 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Bijendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Yogendra Bind Vs The State of Bihar

Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Baitha @ Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Ram Vs The State of Bihar