Patna High Court
Om Paswan @ Om Prakash PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The High Court granted bail to the petitioners subject to a bond, sureties and conditions, finding no sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Summary
The petitioners, Om Paswan and Barelal Paswan, sought relief from anticipated arrest in connection with a FIR dated 24‑12‑2024 alleging offences under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, based on the recovery of 130 litres of illicit country‑made liquor from a jointly owned house. They contended that the allegations were false, they had no prior criminal record, the liquor recovered was only 10 litres each, and the recovery procedure under Section 100 CrPC/Section 103 BNSS was not complied with. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the court noted that similarly situated co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail. Considering the clean antecedent, lack of possession, and procedural lapses, the court ordered that the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC, Section 482(2) BNSS and additional directions. The order also directed the lower court to verify the petitioners’ antecedents and to cancel bail if any concealment or tampering occurs.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail despite the recovery of illicit liquor from a jointly owned premises.
- Whether the procedural requirements under Section 100 CrPC/Section 103 BNSS for seizure were complied with.
- Whether the clean antecedent and the grant of bail to co‑accused justify granting bail to the petitioners.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 100, 103, 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 100, 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illicit liquor
- Section 274 BNSS
- Section 275 BNSS
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- procedural compliance
- joint house property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2016 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-426 Year-2024 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Om Paswan @ Om Prakash Paswan Son of Matuk Paswan Resident of
Village - Pathrahi, Sarsa, P.S. - Ladaniya, Dist. - Madhubani.
2. Barelal Paswan Son of Mushar Paswan Resident of Village - Pathrahi, Sarsa,
P.S. - Ladaniya, Dist. - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Advocate
Mrs. Archana Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2026 Heard Mr. Sheo Nandan Prasad, learned counsel for
the petitioners and Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 426 of 2024, F.I.R.
dated 24.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections
274 and 275 of the B.N.S. and u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 130 litres of illicit country made
liquor from the house of the petitioner and the co-accused
person.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2016 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
2/4
petitioners have clean antecedent and the allegation alleged is
false and fabricated and these petitioners have not committed
any offence as in the F.I.R. From perusal of the F.I.R., it appears
that altogether 10 litres each of local liquor has been recovered
from the house of the petitioners and other co-accused persons
and the recovery has been made from the joint house property
and the petitioners are not the exclusive owner of house in
question. There is non-compliance with madnatory proceudre
prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C./Section
103 of the BNSS and similary situated co-accused persons,
namely, Chandrakala Devi and Lalit Paswan have been granted
anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 03.07.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 25913 of 2025 and co-accused person,
namely, Bahru Paswan has been granted anticipatory bail by a
coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.05.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 23067 of 2025. Learned counsel further
submits that further He further submits that the allegation as
alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioners
have not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2016 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
3/4
and the fact that the petitioners have clean antecedent, nothing
has been recovered from the conscious possession of these
petitioners and similarly situated co-accused persons have been
granted bail by this Court and coordinate Bench, let the
petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days
from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Act, Madhubani in
connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 426 of 2024, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with
other following conditions:
i. Petitioners 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 her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners 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.2016 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
4/4
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…