Patna High Court

Dilip PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 8 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANIL KUMAR SINHA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied because the seizure report linked the illicit liquor to the petitioner’s hut, and the precedent did not support extending bail privilege.

Summary

The petitioner, Dilip Paswan, applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in connection with a case (Sadar P.S. Case No. 1065/2025) for alleged contravention of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, involving the seizure of 85 litres of illicit country‑made liquor from a hut beside a railway line. Paswan contended that the liquor was not recovered from his possession or premises and that his name was implicated solely on the basis of local informants, asserting his innocence and lack of prior criminal record. The court examined the nature of the allegation, the seizure report indicating recovery from a hut attributed to the petitioner, and relevant precedent from Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 431 of 2019 (Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar). Relying on the Full Bench judgment, the judge declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding insufficient grounds to extend the privilege. However, the court indicated that Paswan could surrender and seek regular bail, which the trial court may consider without prejudice to the rejected anticipatory bail application.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances of alleged possession of illicit liquor.
Whether the seizure of liquor from a hut attributed to the petitioner suffices to justify denial of anticipatory bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
illegal liquor
Section 30
bail jurisprudence
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18570 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1065 Year-2025 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR District-
                                                      Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Dilip Paswan S/o Rajdev Paswan R/o vill - Majhauliya, Khabra, P.S.- Sadar,
                 Distt.- Muzaffarpur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s         :       Mr.Arvind Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s     :       Mr.Shaheen Begum
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026      1. Heard the parties.

                     2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with

                   Sadar P.S. Case No. 1065 / 2025 dated 14.12.2025 registered for

                   the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                     3. As per the F.I.R. a total quantity of 85.00 liters of illegal

                   country made liquor has been recovered from a hut built beside

                   Railway line in Majhauliya locality.

                     4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is

                   innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case by the

                   Police due to oblique motive. He further submits that the alleged

                   recovery of illicit country made liquor has been made from a hut

                   built beside Railway line in Majhauliya locality which does not
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18570 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                           2/2




                         belong to the petitioner. He also submits that illicit liquor has

                         not been recovered from the conscious possession and / or

                         premises belonging to the petitioner. He next submits that the

                         name of the petitioner has transpired on the basis of disclosure

                         made by local people. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

                           5. Regard being had to the submissions advanced by the

                         parties, taking into consideration the nature of allegation, the

                         fact that seizure list shows that recovery has been made from the

                         hut of the petitioner and in view of Full Bench judgment

                         rendered in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 431 of 2019 (Ram Vinay Yadav

                         versus The State of Bihar), I am not inclined to extend the

                         privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is

                         rejected.

                             6. However, if the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular

                         bail, the concerned court may consider the prayer for bail on the

                         same day without being prejudiced by the fact that the present

                         anticipatory bail application has been rejected by this court.



                                                  (Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-

U          T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.