Patna High Court
Soharab AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted, subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Soharab Alam, was arrested on 12 January 2026 in connection with a seizure of 927.720 litres of foreign liquor alleged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. The petitioner contended that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the vehicle used, and possessed a clean criminal antecedent. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence and alleged non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, 2023. The Court, after considering the facts, granted bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, presence, and non‑tampering with evidence. The order directed the lower court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent but not to delay bail on that ground.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the alleged non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, 2023, warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 — s. 30(a)
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- bail
- prohibition law
- excise
- foreign liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- non‑possession
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22562 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2026 Thana- KUCHAIKOTE District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Soharab Alam Son of Hasmuddin Miyan @ Hasamuddin Miya Resident of
Village - Balapur, P.S.- Barahariya, District - Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 Heard Mr.Pankaj Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari, learned A.P.P. for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
12.01.2026 in connection with Kuchaikot P.S. Case No. 23 of
2026, F.I.R. dated 11.01.2026 registered for the offence
punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of 927.720 liters of foreign liquor.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. Further submits
that it appears from the FIR as well as the seizure list that
nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the
petitioner rather the recovery has been made from the Pick-up-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22562 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
Van in question and petitioner is not the owner of the vehicle in
question and it appears from the seizure list that there is non-
compliance of Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023 and the
petitioner is in custody since 12.01.2026.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, petitioner has clean
antecedent, 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 learned
District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV-cum-Exclusive
Special Judge, Excise Court-II, Gopalganj in connection with
Kuchaikot P.S. Case No. 23 of 2026, with 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22562 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
(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)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.