Patna High Court
Chandrika KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandrika Kumar, was arrested on 8 March 2026 for alleged contravention of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after the seizure of 396 litres of country‑made foreign liquor. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and that the case was based merely on suspicion with police failing to comply with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The court held that the material on record did not sufficiently link the petitioner to the offence and therefore granted bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses, and verification of criminal antecedent. The bail may be cancelled if any condition is breached.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being in custody for an alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the seizure and investigation complied with statutory requirements of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS.
- Whether mere suspicion without cogent material justifies continued detention.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- bail
- prohibition law
- excise
- seizure
- suspicion
- criminal antecedent
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25415 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2026 Thana- PARIHAR District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Chandrika Kumar S/o Mukesh Ram Resident of Village- Dharaharwa, P.S.-
Parihar, Dist.- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dwij Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Sangeeta Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Dwij Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mrs. Sangeeta Sharma, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
08.03.2026 in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 50/2026,
F.I.R. dated 07.03.2026 for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 396 liters of country made foreign
liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears
from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that nothing has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25415 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
petitioner has been made accused in this case on the basis of
mere suspicion and except suspicion there is no cogent material
which suggests the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged
occurrence. The seizure list witnesses are police personnel and
there is non-compliance of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS.
He further submits that the police after investigation submitted
the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in
custody since 08.03.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
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 the learned court of
Exclusive Excise Court No. 1, Sitamarhi in connection with
Parihar P.S. Case No. 50/2026, subject to 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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25415 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
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.
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)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.