Patna High Court

Shankar MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 18 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court directed the release of the petitioner on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties of equal amount.

Summary

The petitioner, Shankar Mukhiya, sought regular bail in a case under Sections 30(a), 30(b), 30(c), 32 and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging recovery of liquor from a distillery. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, and the alleged recovery occurred on public land, raising doubts about the prosecution’s investigation. The petitioner also highlighted that the complaint originated from a chawkidar and that he had been in custody since 15‑12‑2025, asserting he would not abscond. The State opposed the bail, but the court, after considering the submissions, found the lack of direct possession and investigative lapses sufficient to grant bail. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties of the same amount.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 in view of the facts of non‑possession and alleged procedural lapses.
Whether the circumstances of the case justify the court’s discretion to release the accused on bail.

Legislation cited

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 30(b), 30(c), 32, 41(1)

Subjects

bail
excise law
prohibition
regular bail
investigation lapses
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20611 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2022 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Shankar Mukhiya S/o Late Lalbahadur Mukhiya R/o vill- Koirgawa, PS-
                 Sangrampur, District- East Champaran
                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-04-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 30(b), 30(c), 32 and

                   41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of ten cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 15 litres of liquor from a distillery

                   along with 1500 litres of semi prepared liquor which was

                   destroyed at the spot.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20611 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the

          Chawkidar but then it is submitted that once an accused is

          implicated in a case relating to excise the police start

          implicating mechanically either at the instance of the

          Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation of the case.

          It is next submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the

          involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did

          not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR

          which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is

          also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2025 and

          if the privilege of regular bail is granted to the petitioner, the

          petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to

          prove his innocence. It is submitted that petitioner in similar

          manner earlier also came to be implicated in cases relating to

          excise.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          regular bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner,

          above-named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20611 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
                                                       3/3




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

                     Trial Court where the case is pending in connection with

                     Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 08 of 2022.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…