Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Suryakant KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioners, directing them to furnish a bond of Rs 10,000 each with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioners, Suryakant Kumar and Chandan Kumar, were charged under Sections 30(a), 32(3), 41, 62 and 56(b) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 544.32 litres of liquor from a house rented by them. The prosecution alleged that the liquor was found in an asbestos‑room of Raman Kumar’s premises, but the petitioners were not apprehended at the scene and no liquor was recovered from their possession. The petitioners contended that the landlord was also named in the FIR, indicating that they could not be the sole perpetrators, and they had been in judicial custody since 22 January 2026. The State opposed the bail application, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the lack of direct possession and the involvement of the landlord, ordered that each petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties of the same amount. Consequently, the bail application was allowed.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the Bihar Excise Act given the alleged recovery of liquor and the circumstances of the arrest.

Subjects

  • bail
  • excise law
  • liquor seizure
  • criminal procedure
  • Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13072 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1529 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Patna
                 ======================================================
           1.     Suryakant Kumar S/o- Late Ram Pravesh Ray Resident of Village- Rampur
                  Shyam Bind, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Vaishali. At present- Kadamkuan
                  Park Road, P.S.- Kadamkuan, District- Patna
           2.     Chandan Kumar S/o- Aandan Kumar R/v- Aahra (Dwarikanath Lane)
                  Salimpur, Ps- Gandhi Maidan Dist- Patna
                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-02-2026                  1.     Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(3), 41, 62 and

                   56(b) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners have antecedent of one case under the excise act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 544.32 liters of liquor from asbestos

                   room of Raman Kumar.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing

                   was recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged

                   recovery is from a house which does not belong to the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13072 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      petitioners and they came to be implicated based on an

                      allegation that they are renter in the said house, but then it is

                      submitted that even the landlord was also implicated in the case,

                      it is thus submitted that had the petitioners been involved in the

                      occurrence, in the event the landlord would not have been

                      implicated as an accused in the instant FIR. It is next submitted

                      that petitioner is in judicial custody since 22.01.2026.

                                   5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail

                      application of the petitioners.

                                   6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                      counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, are

                      directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.

                      10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each 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

                      Excise P.S. Case No. 1529 of 2025.

                                   7. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands

                      allowed.



                                                        (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.