Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Dharmendra Rai @ Dharmendra Kumar RayversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner with conditions, despite the alleged seizure irregularities and prior offences.

Summary

The petitioner, Dharmendra Rai, applied for bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 90 litres of country-made liquor seized from a semi‑manufactured temple. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that the seizure was made from an open place and not from his possession, and that the police failed to comply with Section 105 of the BNSS during the seizure. The State opposed bail, citing two prior similar offences. After hearing both sides, the Court considered the facts, the petitioner’s custody since 8 February 2026, and his criminal antecedents, and decided to grant bail on condition that he not commit similar offences. The bail was ordered on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties of the same amount, to be satisfied before the Special Judge Excise‑I, Saran.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
  • Whether the alleged non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS affects the bail decision.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • Section 30(a)
  • seizure
  • Section 105
  • BNSS
  • criminal antecedent
  • judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17102 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2026 Thana- AKILPUR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Dharmendra Rai @ Dharmendra Kumar Ray S/o Vakil Ray @ Wakil Rai R/o
                 vill- Harsam Chak/ Bada Harsam Chak, P.S- Akilpur, Distt.- Saran

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Akilpur P.S. Case No. 25 of 2026 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise Act.

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

                   semi manufactured temple, altogether 90 liters of country made

                   liquor was recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

                   committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

                   case. He also submits that from perusal of the seizure list, it is

                   clear that the recovery was not made from the possession of this
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17102 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                                       2/2




                     petitioner rather the recovery was made from an open place.

                     Nothing has been recovered from the possession of this

                     petitioner. He also submits that the witnesses of the seizure list

                     are police personnel and the police has not complied with

                     Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. Moreover,

                     the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since

                     08.02.2026.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

                     antecedent of two cases of similar nature.

                                  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 with the condition

                     that the petitioner shall not indulge in similar nature of

                     offences in future. The above named petitioner is directed to

                     be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs.

                     ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to

                     the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge Excise-I, Saran at

                     Chapra in connection with Akilpur P.S. Case No. 25 of 2026.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

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.