Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court held that the petitioner should be released on bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. due to the vague allegations and risk of false implication, subject to prescribed conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Ranjan Kumar, sought bail fearing arrest in Excise Case No. 844 of 2026, which alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act based on secret informant information about illicit liquor being unloaded from a truck. The prosecution recovered 86.40 litres of foreign liquor and 24 litres of beer from the truck, but no incriminating material was found on the petitioner. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he had no connection to the truck or the liquor and was falsely implicated, noting an unrelated pending case on bail. The State opposed the bail. Considering the vague allegations, the possibility of false implication, and lack of direct evidence against the petitioner, the court granted bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., requiring a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and the petitioner’s presence in court as required.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the vague nature of the allegations and lack of direct evidence.
  • Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are appropriate for granting bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • excise
  • illicit liquor
  • false implication
  • secret informant
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • Section 30(a)
  • Section 482(2)

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28673 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Ranjan Kumar S/o Jasim Nat, R/o Village- Bishrampur, PS- Sasaram M, Dist-
                 Rohtas.
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                       ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner        :        Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate
                 For the State             :        Mr. Meena Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   30-04-2026                        Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                      2.   In   the     present      case,     the     petitioner      is

                   apprehending his arrest in connection with Excise Case No. 844

                   of 2026, arising out of Sasaram Excise P.S. Case No. 149 of

                   2026, dated 22.03.2026, registered for the offences punishable

                   under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                      3. As per prosecution case, informant received

                   secret information about the petitioner and co-accused

                   unloading illicit liquor from a ten-wheeler truck and the said

                   truck was found standing in an abandoned condition. On search

                   of the said truck, recovery of 86.40 litres of illicit foreign liquor

                   and 24 litres of illicit beer was made.

                                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28673 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
                                            2/3




          case. Petitioner has no concern either with the truck in question

          or with the illicit liquor which was recovered from the said

          truck. It shows that nothing incriminating has been recovered

          from the person or possession of the petitioner. In the most

          casual manner, petitioner has been named on the basis of secret

          information for being involved in the alleged occurrence.

          Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner is having

          antecedent of one case of different nature in which he is on bail.

                          5. Learned APP opposes the submissions made on

          behalf of the petitioner.

                          6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and

          submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the

          completely vague nature of allegation levelled against the

          petitioner and further considering the possibility of false

          implication, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his

          arrest or surrender before the Court concerned within a period of

          eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail

          bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

          Exclusive Special Judge, Court No. 1, Rohtas at Sasaram, in

          connection with Excise Case No. 844 of 2026, arising out of

          Sasaram Excise P.S. Case No. 149 of 2026, subject to the
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28673 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
                                                      3/3




                    conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                    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.


                                                                (Arun Kumar Jha, J)

Shahnawaz/-

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.