Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Binod RayversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

Bail is granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, with a condition not to commit similar offences.

Summary

The petitioner, Binod Ray, applied for bail in a case where 108 litres of illicit foreign liquor were seized from a vehicle he was driving. He contended that he was merely a driver, had no knowledge of the liquor, and that the police seizure violated Section 105 of the BNSS. The State opposed bail, citing three prior similar offences against the petitioner. After hearing both sides, the Court considered the lack of direct possession and the procedural lapse in seizure. The Court granted bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and directed the petitioner not to engage in similar offences in the future.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite alleged involvement in illicit liquor possession.
  • Whether the seizure complied with Section 105 of the BNSS, affecting the bail application.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents warrant denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • prohibition
  • excise
  • illicit liquor
  • seizure
  • Section 105 compliance
  • prior criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20759 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
                 ======================================================
                 Binod Ray Son of Late Dina Nath Ray Resident of Village- Jamira, P.S.- Ara
                 Muffasil, District- Bhojpur
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Bhahua Prohibition and Excise Thana F.I.R. No. and P.R. No. 45

                   of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections

                   30(a), 32(i)(iii) and 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

                   Act.

                                 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that

                   altogether 108 liters of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from a

                   Triber car.

                                 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

                   offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also

                   submits that petitioner is merely a driver he was driving the car on

                   the instruction of the owner. The petitioner was unaware of the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20759 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     alleged liquor and recovery thereof. He further submits that

                     nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

                     The witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and the

                     police has not complied with Section 105 of the BNSS while

                     making the seizure. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in

                     judicial custody since 29.01.2026.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

                     antecedent of three cases of similar nature.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the condition that

                     the petitioner shall not indulge himself in similar nature of the

                     offences in future. The above named petitioner is directed to be

                     enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten

                     thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

                     satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise-II,

                     Kaimur in connection with Bhahua Prohibition and Excise Thana

                     F.I.R. No. and P.R. No. 45 of 2026.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.