Patna High Court
Pawan Singh @ Pawan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner with conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Pawan Singh, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for allegedly transporting 192 litres of illicit Mahua liquor. Police intercepted a vehicle, recovered the liquor, and the driver identified the petitioner and other co‑accused who fled the scene. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that no liquor or other incriminating material was recovered from him, and that procedural safeguards under Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS were violated as there was no audio‑visual recording of the seizure. The State opposed the bail application. Considering the lack of direct recovery, the petitioner’s custody period, and the procedural lapses, the Court ordered his release on bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the allegations under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the alleged violations of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 103, 105, 480(3)
Subjects
- bail
- illicit liquor
- prohibition act
- procedural violation
- Section 103
- Section 105
- Section 480(3)
- Bihar
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25607 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-300 Year-2024 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Pawan Singh @ Pawan Kumar Son of Dharmraj Sah @ Dharmaraj Sah
Resident of Village- Basara Police Station- Sikarahata District -Bhojpur At
Present Resident of Shivganj, Ps- Ara Nagar, Dist- Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Akash Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Pronoti Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 300 of 2024,
registered for the offences under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. As per the prosecution case, police received secret
information about transportation of liquor in a vehicle and the
said vehicle was intercepted and two persons started running
away from the vehicle and the driver was apprehended.
Recovery of 192 litres of country made Mahua liquor was made
from the said vehicle. The apprehended coaccused driver named
this petitioner and other coaccused who fled away from the
vehicle and were involved in trade of illicit liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and nothing
incriminating has been recovered from person or possession of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25607 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
the petitioner. Petitioner was not apprehended from the spot.
Petitioner has been dragged in this case merely on the disclosure
statement of the apprehended accused person namely Vikash
Kumar with whom petitioner has inimical terms. The petitioner
and coaccused Vikash Kumar resides in the same locality and in
order to settle the previous dispute, the petitioner has been
named for being involved in the present case. There is complete
violation of Section 103 of the BNSS and no audio/video
recording of the seizure was done in clear violation of Section
105 of the BNSS. Coaccused Vikash Kumar has been granted
regular bail vide order dated 19.06.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
41846 of 2024 by a learned Single Judge of this Court and the
case of the petitioner is on much better footing. The petitioner is
not the owner of the vehicle from which recovery has been
made and he has got no concern with the seized liquor. The
petitioner has antecedent of one case in which he is on bail. The
petitioner is in custody since 26.02.2026.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the
submission made on behalf of the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and
submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the
fact that no recovery has been shown from this petitioner and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25607 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
also considering his period of custody, the petitioner is directed
to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special
Excise Court 1st, Bhojpur at Ara/concerned court, in connection
with Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 300 of 2024, subject to the
condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and
other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close
relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on
each and every date fixed by the court
below, if so required by the learned trial
court.
(iii) In case of absence on three
consecutive dates or in violation of the
terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled
by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Anuradha/-
U T
Checking your session…