Patna High Court
Sunil Kumar @ Sunil PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions, despite the alleged offence and prior antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Sunil Kumar, was arrested on 20‑12‑2025 in connection with a 2020 case involving the alleged illegal possession of 1,339.890 litres of foreign liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018. He contended that the liquor was seized from a rickshaw and not from his conscious possession, asserting his innocence. The prosecution opposed bail, highlighting two prior criminal antecedents of a similar nature, one of which is pending trial. The court, after considering the facts, ordered the release of the petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was made subject to cancellation if the petitioner violates any of the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
- Whether the absence of conscious possession of the seized liquor negates the ground for denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify refusal of bail.
Subjects
- bail
- prohibition law
- excise
- foreign liquor
- criminal antecedent
- surety
- Section 30(a)
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18650 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-422 Year-2020 Thana- DUMRA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Paswan Son of Nagendra Paswan R/o village - Balua,
P.S.- Dumra, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sucheta Yadav, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-03-2026 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Ms. Sucheta Yadav, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
20.12.2025 in connection with Dumra P.S. Case No. 422 of
2020, F.I.R. dated 26.12.2020 for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of 1339.890 liters of foreign liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case merely on the basis of suspicion. He further
submits that it appears from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that
nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of
the petitioner rather the recovery has been made from rickshaw
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18650 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
2/3
in question and the petitioner has no concern at all with the
alleged recovery of liquor and the petitioner is in custody since
20.12.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner carries two criminal antecedents of
similar nature in which he is on bail in one case and the other
case is pending for consideration in the competent court of law.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
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 Excise Court no.1, Sitamarhi in connection with Dumra
P.S. Case No. 422 of 2020, subject to 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
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18650 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
3/3
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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…