Patna High Court
Amit Paswan @ Amit Kumar Paswan @ Amit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted because the petitioner was remanded only on suspicion and the seized liquor was not in his possession.
Summary
The petitioner Amit Paswan was arrested on 7 February 2026 in connection with a case involving alleged illegal possession of 10 litres of Mahua liquor, alleged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018. The liquor was recovered from a motorcycle that does not belong to the petitioner; the vehicle’s owner, Geeta Kumari, had earlier been granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner contended that he had no knowledge of the seizure and was implicated solely on suspicion and a witness’s statement, and pointed to his lack of prior involvement in the specific incident. The prosecution opposed bail, citing three prior similar offences. The court observed that the seizure was not from the petitioner’s conscious possession and that he had been remanded only on suspicion, and therefore granted bail subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 and conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 when the seized liquor was not in his possession.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.
- Whether the fact that the seizure was made from a vehicle owned by another person precludes the grant of bail.
Subjects
- bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- possession
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- excise law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19351 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2024 Thana- BANNUBAGICHA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Amit Paswan @ Amit Kumar Paswan @ Amit Kumar Son of Om Prakash
Paswan @ Late Om Prakash Paswan R/O Village - Titaichak, P.S.- Chanan,
District – Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 31-03-2026 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
07.02.2026 in connection with Bannubagicha P.S. Case No. 56 of
2024, F.I.R. dated 10.08.2024 for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of 10 liters of Mahua liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. as
well as seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has been
made from motorcycle in question. Petitioner is not the owner of
the motorcycle in question and he has been initially arrested in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19351 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
2/3
Chanan P.S. Case No.06 of 2026, thereafter he has been remanded
in this case, only on suspicion as well on the basis of his previous
criminal antecedents. Infact the motorcycle in question belongs to
one Geeta Kumari and she has been granted anticipatory bail by
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.11.2024 in Cr.
Misc. No.77141 of 2024. He next submits that during investigation
one witness, namely Luton Manjhi, on suspicion disclosed the
name of the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since
07.02.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner carries three criminal antecedent other than
the present one of similar nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as
well as the fact that the owner of the alleged motorcycle in
question has been granted anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Bench
of this Court and petitioner has been remanded in the present case
only on the basis of suspicion, let the petitioner, above named, 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 the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-
VII-cum-Exclusive Special Excise Court-II, Lakhisarai in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19351 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
3/3
connection with Bannubagicha P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024, subject
to the following conditions:-
i. 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
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. 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.
iii. 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…