Ankit SharmaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15313 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2026 Thana- NAUTAN District- Siwan
                 ======================================================
                 Ankit Sharma Son of Kisan Sharma @ Kishan Sharma Resident of Village-
                 Sundarpur Ps -Nautan District -Siwan
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   11-03-2026                  Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for

                   the petitioner and Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, learned APP for

                   the State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   02.02.2026 in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No. 31 of 2026,

                   F.I.R. dated 01.12.2026 for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise(Amendment)

                   Act, 2018.

                                3. As per prosecution case, total 135 litres of illicit

                   country made liquor has been recovered from a Tempu.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

                   implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the

                   FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed

                   any offence as alleged in the FIR. It appears from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15313 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
                                            2/3




          FIR/seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the

          conscious possession of this petitioner rather the alleged

          recovery is made from a vehicle (Tempu) and petitioner is

          neither the owner nor the driver of the tempu. He has no

          knowledge about the alleged recovery. From perusal of seizure

          list, there is non compliance of section 103 of the BNSS. He

          further submits that Police after investigation submitted

          chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody

          since 02.02.2026.

                       5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

          the prayer for bail.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case and also the fact that the petitioner has clean

          antecedent, petitioner is neither the owner nor driver of the

          seized tempu and there is non-complaince of section 103 BNSS,

          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 Exclusive

          Special Judge, Excise Court-II, Siwan in connection with

          Nautan P.S. Case No. 31 of 2026, with 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15313 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

                      on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                      reason, his/her 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)
Ranjeet/-

U      T