Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

HIMANSHU KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner sought regular bail in a case under sections 30(a), 41 and 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act where 297.84 litres of country‑made liquor were seized from a car. The prosecution alleged that two persons fled the scene and the petitioner was later apprehended. The petitioner contended that he was neither the driver nor the owner, had no knowledge of the liquor, and that the seizure was not made in compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS, also highlighting his clean criminal record and his detention since 20‑01‑2026. The State opposed the bail application. After hearing both sides, the court found the petitioner’s arguments persuasive and ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Exclusive Special Judge, Excise‑01, Purnea.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seizure of a large quantity of illicit liquor.
  • Whether the seizure complied with Section 105 of the BNSS, affecting the bail consideration.
  • Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession, ownership, and clean antecedent justify granting bail.

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • seizure
  • possession
  • criminal antecedent
  • excise law
  • bail petition

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16416 of 2026
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2026 Thana- BAISI District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 HIMANSHU KUMAR S/O SIKANDAR YADAV R/V- DHURGAUN
                 WARD NO. 01, P.S.- BHARRAHI, DIST.- MADHEPURA

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 THE STATE OF BIHAR PATNA

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
                                                   Ms. Divya Bharti, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-03-2026                      Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under sections 30(a), 41

                   and 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                 3. The case of the prosecution is that from a car,

                   altogether 297.840 liters of country made liquor was recovered.

                   As per the case of the prosecution, there were two persons in the

                   said car who started fleeing away but later on this petitioner was

                   apprehended.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned

                   counsel for the petitioner has submitted that nothing has been
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16416 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                                        2/2




                      recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He

                      has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner is neither the

                      driver nor the owner of the said vehicle. He has no knowledge

                      regarding the alleged recovery. The witnesses of the seizure list

                      are police personnel and police has not complied Section 105 of

                      BNSS while preparing seizure. A statement has been made in

                      para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal

                      antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since

                      20.01.2026.

                                   5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

                      vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

                                   6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                      considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is

                      inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                      petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with

                      Baisi P.S. Case No. 29 of 2026 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 Judge

                      Excise-01, Purnea.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
shubham/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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