Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

KRISHNA MANDAL @ KANHAIYA MANDALversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties.

Summary

Krishna Mandal, owner of a Scorpio vehicle, was implicated in a case (PS 334/2022) for alleged recovery of 180.36 litres of liquor, violating Sections 30(a), 32(i), 32(ii) and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act. The petitioner argued that he was not apprehended at the spot, had no liquor in his conscious possession, and was unaware that his driver misused the vehicle. He also highlighted that he had been in custody since 12‑01‑2026 and would not abscond if released on bail. The State opposed the bail on grounds of the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s prior cases. The Court, after considering the submissions, ordered the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, directing compliance with the trial court’s conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused in offences under Sections 30(a), 32(i), 32(ii) and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act when the accused was not found in possession of the seized liquor.
  • Whether ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence makes the owner liable to be denied bail.
  • Whether the petitioner poses a flight risk or threat to the investigation despite prior criminal antecedents.

Subjects

  • bail
  • excise law
  • seizure
  • vehicle ownership
  • criminal procedure
  • Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24832 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2022 Thana- SABAUR District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 KRISHNA MANDAL @ KANHAIYA MANDAL S/o Kailu Mandal Resident
                 of village- Majarhat, ward no. 12, P.S.- Singheshwar Sthan, District-
                 Madhepura

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Diwakar Upadhyaya, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 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 30(a), 32(i) (ii) and 41 of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases

                   are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 180.36

                   liters of liquor from a Scorpio 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24832 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use

                      his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

                      create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

                      it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

                      that Manish would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged

                      who was also apprehended from the spot along with Naveen. It

                      is also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 12.01.2026

                      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.

                      5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Sabaur

                      P.S. Case No. 334 of 2022.



                                                              (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.