Patna High Court
Raj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner with a bond and conditions of appearance.
Summary
The petitioner, Raj Kumar, was arrested in a wagon‑R car from which 345.6 litres of illicit foreign liquor and a pistol were seized, leading to charges under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, and Sections 25(1‑B)(a) and 26 of the Arms Act. He applied for regular bail after being in custody since 16‑06‑2025, contending that he was neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicle and had no involvement with the seized material. An earlier bail application had been rejected. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the prolonged custody and the tardy progress of the trial. Considering these factors, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance before the trial court. The order also provides for cancellation of bail if the petitioner fails to appear on two consecutive dates without a plausible reason.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the nature of the offences and his custody since June 2025
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of ownership or driver status of the seized vehicle and material affects the bail decision
- Whether the delay in trial proceedings justifies the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 317(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- prohibition act
- arms act
- trial delay
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12557 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-307 Year-2025 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Raj Kumar son of Ranjit Prasad @ Ranjjit Bhagat @ Ranjit Kumar Resident
of village -Shitalpur PS- Chakia, Distt -East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 03-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Chakia P.S. Case No.307 of 2025 for the offence registered
under Sections 317(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Section
30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and Section 25(1-B)
(a) and 26 of the Arms Act.
3. The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier
rejected by this Court vide order dated 18.09.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 56158 of 2025.
4. As per prosecution case, 345.6 litre illicit foreign
liquor and one pistol were recovered from the Wagon-R car in
which petitioner was sitting and he was apprehended.
5. The report of Trial Court dated 07.03.2026 reveals
that the charge has been framed on 23.02.2026 and summon has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12557 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
2/2
been issued to the witnesses.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is neither owner nor driver of seized vehicle and he
has no concern with the seized material. Further submission is
that petitioner is in custody since 16.06.2025 and there is no
likelihood of conclusion of the trial in near future.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the bail
application.
8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case, period of custody and tardy progress of the trial, 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 learned Exclusive Special
Excise Court No. 3, East Champaran in connection with
Chakiya P.S. Case No. 307 of 2025 with following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail
bond by the learned Trial Court itself.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
Ritik/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.