Patna High Court
Hitendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, finding no conscious possession of the illegal liquor and a clean antecedent.
Summary
Hitendra Kumar was arrested on 4 February 2026 as the driver and alleged owner of a truck from which 8,816.76 litres of illegal country-made liquor were seized. He was charged under Sections 30(a), 32(2) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent and that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, contending that he was implicated merely because he drove the vehicle. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Court, noting the absence of any seizure from the petitioner's personal control and his clean record, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 30(a), 32(2) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
- Whether the fact that the seized liquor was not in the accused's conscious possession warrants bail.
- Whether the accused's clean antecedent and the circumstances of the arrest justify release on bail.
Subjects
- bail
- illegal liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- possession
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21352 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2026 Thana- KUCHAIKOTE District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Hitendra Kumar Son of Kishna Ram Resident of Village- Sewniyala, P.S.-
Baytu, District- Barmer, (Rajasthan)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dewanand Tiwari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 Heard Mr. Dewanand Tiwari, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
04.02.2026 in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 55 of
2026, F.I.R. dated 03.02.2026 for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a), 32(2) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of 8,816.76 liters illegal country made
liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears
from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that nothing has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21352 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather
the recovery has been made from truck in question and the
petitioner has been made accused merely on the basis that he is
the driver of the vehicle in question and owner of the truck in
question namely, Dharam Ram has been apprehended by the
police and the petitioner is in custody since 04.02.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and nothing has been recovered
from the conscious possession of the petitioner, 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 District &
Additional Sessions Judge-IV-cum-Exclusive Special Excise
Court-II, Gopalganj in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case
No. 55 of 2026,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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21352 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
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.
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…