Patna High Court

Shivlal MarandiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 3 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SONI SHRIVASTAVA

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.

Summary

The petitioner, Shivlal Marandi, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly discarding a plastic gallon containing 10 litres of country‑made liquor, based solely on the testimony of a local chowkidar. The petitioner argued that there was no physical or conscious possession of the liquor, no independent witness to the seizure, and that the mandatory procedures for search and seizure were violated, rendering the accusation mechanically made without concrete evidence. The State opposed bail, citing two prior similar convictions, although bail had been granted in those earlier cases. The Court, after considering the lack of direct evidence and procedural lapses, ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order was conditioned on the petitioner surrendering within six weeks if arrested.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted in the absence of direct evidence and alleged violation of search and seizure provisions.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

bail
search and seizure
excise law
prior convictions
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17990 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2025 Thana- TIKAPATTI District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Shivlal Marandi S/o- Late Shyam Marandi R/v- Teldiha Santhal Tola PS-
                 Tikapatti District- Purnia Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Vijay Kumar Vimal
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Sanjay Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-04-2026                      Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                   2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                   3. Perusal of the first information report and the

                   seizure list, would go to show that 10 liters of country made

                   liquor is said to have been recovered from a plastic gallon and it

                   was alleged by the local Chowkidar that it was the petitioner

                   who had thrown away the said gallon.

                                   4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the

                   petitioner that there is no recovery from the physical and

                   conscious possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that the

                   petitioner is being made an accused in such cases under Excise

                   Act mechanically without any concrete evidence against him. It
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17990 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
                                                         2/2




                       is further submitted that the mandatory provisions of search and

                       seizure have been violated as there is no independent witness to

                       the seizure list.

                                         5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                       bail on the ground that petitioner has two criminal antecedents

                       of similar nature of the offence, to which, learned counsel for

                       the petitioner submits that the bail orders have been passed in

                       both the cases.

                                    6.       Taking into consideration the facts and

                       circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner in the

                       event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

                       within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on

                       furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with

                       two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                       learned court below where the case is pending/successor court

                       in connection with Tikapatti P.S. Case No. 202 of 2025, subject

                       to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the

                       Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.



                                                 (Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…