Patna High Court
Pratik Kumar @ Pratik Raj @ PratikversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted as the confessional statement of the co‑accused was held to have no evidentiary value and the petitioner had no direct possession of the seized liquor.
Summary
The petitioner, Pratik Kumar, was charged under IPC sections 468, 471, 420, 414 and 34, and Bihar Excise Act sections 30(a), 32, 36 and 41 for allegedly recovering 5,951.8 liters of liquor from five vehicles. He contended that he was not apprehended at the scene, had no possession of the liquor, and was not the owner of the vehicles, and that the only link to him was a confessional statement of co‑accused Ranjan made while in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the relevance of the confessional statement and the lack of direct material possession, and considered the petitioner’s custody since 1 November 2025. Concluding that the prosecution’s case did not establish a strong prima facie case, the Court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- What is the evidentiary value of a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody?
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving multiple serious offences under the IPC and Excise Act when the accused has no direct possession of the seized liquor.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 414, 420, 468, 471
Subjects
- bail
- confessional statement
- evidentiary value
- IPC offences
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.257 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2023 Thana- CHACKMEHSI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Pratik Kumar @ Pratik Raj @ Pratik S/o Sri Abhilash Mishra R/o Village -
Ghogharaha, Post - Jatmalpur, P.S - Chakmeshi, District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Meena Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-01-2026 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 468, 471, 420, 414 and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 30(a), 32, 36 and 41 of
the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 5951.800 liters of liquor from five different
vehicles.
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 is not the
owner of any of the seized vehicles and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.257 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
2/2
implicated based on confessional statement of Ranjan in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value and
petitioner is in custody since 01.11.2025.
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.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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
Chakmehsi P.S. Case No. 72 of 2023.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…