Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sonu kumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioners, directing them to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioners, Sonu Kumar and Indu Devi, applied for bail in a case (Taraiya P.S. Case No.81 of 2026) involving alleged possession of 133.56 litres of illicit foreign liquor, alleged under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018. The prosecution argued that the liquor was recovered from a vehicle owned by petitioner No.1, while the petitioners contended that nothing was recovered from their personal possession and that the seizure was not made in compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS. They also highlighted their lack of prior criminal record and that they had been in judicial custody since 1 March 2026. The State opposed bail. After hearing both sides, the Court found the petitioners’ arguments persuasive and ordered that they be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Exclusive Special Excise Court.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
  • Whether the seizure of the alleged illicit liquor complied with Section 105 of the BNSS.
  • Whether the absence of criminal antecedents and the circumstances of custody justify bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • seizure procedure
  • Section 105 BNSS
  • judicial custody
  • criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23031 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2026 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran
                 ======================================================
           1.     Sonu kumar S/O Chunmun Singh Resident of Village- Madhuban, P.S-
                  Sarairanjan, District- Samastipur.
           2.    Indu Devi W/O Dharmdas R/O Village- Mordeva, P.S- Muffasil, Distt.-
                 Samastipur.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Madhav Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioners have prayed for bail in connection

                   with Taraiya P.S. Case No.81 of 2026 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 30(a) & 41 of the Bihar Prohibition

                   and Excise Act, 2018.

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

                   car altogether 133.56 liters of illicit foreign liquor was

                   recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioners has submitted that petitioner no.1 is the owner of the

                   vehicle whereas petitioner no.2 has taken life in that car.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23031 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that

                      nothing has been recovered from the possession of these

                      petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further

                      submitted that the witnesses of the seizure list are police

                      personnel and police have not complied Section 105 of the

                      BNSS while making seizure. Learned counsel for the petitioners

                      has lastly submitted that the petitioners are having no criminal

                      antecedent and they are in judicial custody since 01.03.2026.

                                   5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                      for the State.

                                   6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

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

                      inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named

                      petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                      bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two

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

                      of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court no.-3, Saran at

                      Chapra in connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No.81 of 2026.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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