Pappu Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23564 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2025 Thana- Shivnarayanpur District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
           1.     Pappu Kumar Yadav S/o Ramsi Yadav, R/o vill- Sabalpur, P.S- Pirpainti,
                  Dist.- Bhagalpur.
           2.    Vipin Yadav @ Vipin Kr. Yadav, S/o Yamuna Yadav, R/o vill-Purani
                 Sahebganj, P.S. and Dist.- Sahebganj, Jharkhand.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Baijnath Sah, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Nityanand, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   03-06-2026                      Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners and

                   learned Advocate for the State through virtual mode.

                                2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection

                   with Shivnarayanpur P.S. Case No.83 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition

                   and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Acting upon a tip-off regarding transporting of

                   illicit wine, the police intercepted a Tractor and apprehended its

                   driver. In course of search, total 192.00 litres of illicit wine was

                   recovered. The apprehended person disclosed the name of

                   petitioner no. 2 as owner of the Tractor. The name of petitioner

                   no. 1 has further been implicated in this case on being found
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23564 of 2026(3) dt.03-06-2026
                                            2/3




          him original owner of the Tractor.

                       4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that

          though petitioner no. 1 was the registered owner of the Tractor

          in question, but subsequently he sold the same to petitioner

          no.2, Vipin Yadav. It is further submitted that on the alleged date

          of occurrence, the Tractor in question which is ordinarily used

          for the transportation of goods, had been taken by co-accused

          Bhim Mandal for carrying straw. The petitioners had no

          knowledge whatsoever that the vehicle would be used for any

          illicit purpose. Neither the petitioners had any concern with the

          illicit liquor nor had they ever instructed or authorized anyone to

          use the Tractor for the transportation of such liquor. Thus, the

          rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and

          Excise Act 2016 (for short ‘the Act, 2016’) does not attract in

          the case in hand. Nothing has been recovered from the

          conscious or constructive possession of the petitioners and

          moreover, there is complete defiance of Sections 103 and 105 of

          the BNSS; besides, the petitioners are carrying fair antecedent.

                       5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State

          vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that

          since the petitioners are the owners of the Tractor from which

          the alleged recovery was made, their complicity in the

          commission of the offence cannot be ruled out.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23564 of 2026(3) dt.03-06-2026
                                                          3/3




                                     6. Having considered the submissions advanced by

                        the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note

                        of the fact that the Tractor in question was being used for the

                        transportation of goods on rent and there is no other materials

                        suggesting the complicity of the petitioners in the crime or the

                        illicit liquor was being transported at their instance, besides their

                        fair antecedent and lack of materials attracting the rigors

                        provided under Section 76(2) of the Act 2016, let the above

                        named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their

                        arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a

                        period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

                        10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like

                        amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.D.J.-XII Exclusive

                        Special Excise Judge-II, Bhagalpur in connection with

                        Shivnarayanpur P.S. Case No.83 of 2025, subject to the

                        condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with

                        further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close

                        family members of the petitioners.



                                                    (Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-

U         T