Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sonu Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.500 and two sureties of the same amount.

Summary

The petitioner, Sonu Kumar Sah, was arrested in connection with the alleged recovery of 701.25 litres of liquor from his pickup vehicle, facing charges under IPC sections 272, 273 and 34 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. He contended that he had a clean record, was not apprehended at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and that his driver acted without his knowledge. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The court considered the petitioner's assertions, his lack of prior criminal history, and the fact that he was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest. Concluding that the petitioner was unlikely to abscond and would cooperate with the trial, the court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.500 with two sureties of the same amount. The bail order was directed to be complied with by the trial court handling the case.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused in offences punishable under IPC sections 272, 273, 34 and Bihar Excise Act Section 30(a).
  • Whether the accused is likely to abscond or tamper with evidence given the circumstances of the alleged offence.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Bihar Excise Act
  • liquor seizure
  • vehicle owner liability
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24811 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2024 Thana- Narhiya District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Sonu Kumar Sah Son of Arjun Sah R/O Vill- Prakash Nagar Siliguri,
                 Rajendra Prasad Road, P.S.- Siliguri Distt- Darjeeling (West Bengal)

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms. Pronoti Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-04-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 and 34 of the

                   Indian Penal Code read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise

                   Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 701.25 liters of liquor from a pick up vehicle.

                                4. Learned      counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing

                   was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be

                   implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized

                   vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24811 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

                      create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

                      it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that

                      his driver would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged

                      who also fled from the spot. It is also submitted that petitioner is

                      in custody since 13.03.2026 and if privilege of bail is granted,

                      the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial

                      to prove his innocence.

                                   5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail

                      application of the petitioner.

                                   6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                      counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, is

                      directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.

                      500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the like

                      amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where

                      the case is pending/successor court in connection with Narhiya

                      P.S. Case No. 18 of 2024.



                                                        (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

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.