Patna High Court
Dilbag Singh @ Dilbaj SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that because the alleged liquor and the premises do not belong to the petitioner, he is entitled to pre‑arrest bail subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilbag Singh, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 6.160 litres of illicit liquor recovered from a cow shed behind a hotel. The petitioner contended that he neither owned the cow shed nor the hotel and was not involved in the sale or consumption of the liquor. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, after noting that the premises and liquor did not belong to the petitioner, directed that he be released on pre‑arrest bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The court also directed the district court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, stating that the order would lapse if he is found involved in other cases.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is liable for the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted in view of the alleged possession of illicit liquor.
- Whether the ownership of the premises and liquor affects the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- Section 482
- illicit liquor
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20939 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2026 Thana- BARUN District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Dilbag Singh @ Dilbaj Singh S/o Fauja Singh Resident of Village- Singhpur
Jatta, P.S.- Hajipur (Mukeriya), District- Hoshiarpur (Punjab). At present R/o
Village- Bagga Punjabi Dhaba Jogiya, P.S.- Barun, District- Aurangabad
(Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Mukul Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Ms. Mukul Kumari, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan,
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Barun P.S.Case No.28 of 2026, registered for the offences
punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, 6.160 ltr. of
country-made liquor has been recovered from the cow shed
(Goshala) situated behind the hotel.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not involved in either
sale or consumption of the liquor. He further submitted that
neither the said cow shed nor the Hotel belong to the petitioner.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20939 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/2
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, the said hotel and the cow shed
do not belong to the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the district court within a period of four weeks from
today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned district court where the case is pending in connection
with Barun P.S.Case No.28 of 2026 subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./Section 482(2) of
BNSS.
7. The learned district court is directed to verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the
petitioner is involved in some other cases as what has been
stated in paragraph No.3 of the bail application, this order will
automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U T
Checking your session…