Patna High Court
Amit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, with a condition for cancellation if a criminal antecedent under the Act is later discovered.
Summary
The petitioner Amit Kumar was arrested in connection with a case registered under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 after 32.04 litres of IMFL were allegedly recovered from his possession. He has been in custody since 6 April 2026 and claims no incriminating article was found on him, asserting false implication and having no prior criminal record. The State opposed his regular bail application. The Court, after hearing counsel, considered the allegation, the duration of custody, and the petitioner’s clean antecedent under the Act. It ordered that the petitioner be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to cancellation if a criminal antecedent later emerges. The order was pronounced by Justice Partha Sarthy.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to the accused under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 considering the nature of the offence, custody period, and absence of prior antecedent.
- Whether imposing a condition that bail may be cancelled upon discovery of a criminal antecedent under the Act is permissible.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- regular bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016
- section 30(a)
- IMFL
- excise offence
- criminal antecedent
- bond
- sureties
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29312 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2026 Thana- Excise Mashrakh District- Saran
======================================================
Amit Kumar S/O Nivedan Ray R/O Village- Raghopur ward no. 07, P.S-
Jurawanpur, District- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Chetna, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Mashrakh Excise P.S.
Case no. 46 of 2026 registered under section 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. As per the prosecution case, 32.04 litres of IMFL
was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he was
taken into custody.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioner’s
possession. He has been falsely implicated in the case. He is in
custody since 6.4.2026 and has no criminal antecedent. He
undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29312 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/2
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in
the FIR, the petitioner having remained in custody since
6.4.2026 and specially his not having any antecedent under the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, the Court directs the
petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with Mashrakh Excise
P.S. Case no. 46 of 2026 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of the learned 3rd Exclusive Special Excise Court,
Saran at Chapra on the following condition:
(i) If it subsequently transpires that the petitioner has
a criminal antecedent under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act, 2016, the prosecution will be at liberty to move this Court
for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.