Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ramnath RayversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Ramnath Ray, a driver, was arrested in connection with the seizure of 2,430 litres of illicit foreign liquor from his truck under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He asserted that he had no knowledge of the contraband, that nothing was recovered from his possession, and that he had no prior criminal record, having been in judicial custody since 24 March 2026. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence. The Court examined the facts, noting the petitioner’s claim of innocence, lack of direct involvement, and the alleged procedural lapse of non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS during the seizure. Accordingly, the Court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties. The bail order was directed to be executed by the Exclusive Special Excise‑II, Vaishali.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted to a person accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act when the alleged involvement is limited to being a driver and there is no direct possession of the contraband.
  • Whether the alleged non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS in making the seizure affects the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • Section 30(a)
  • illicit liquor
  • driver
  • seizure
  • surety
  • judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30279 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2026 Thana- EXCISE MAHUWA District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Ramnath Ray S/O Ramsawroop Ray R/O Vill.- Simarwara (Ward no.15), P.s.-
                 Patepur, Dist.- Vaishali.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Suruchi Anand, Advocate.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   22-06-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the

                   offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition

                   and Excise Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from a

                   truck, altogether 2430 liters of illicit foreign liquor was

                   recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

                   committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

                   case. He also submits that nothing has been recovered from the

                   possession of the petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are

                   police personnel and the police has not complied with Section
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30279 of 2026(3) dt.22-06-2026
                                                       2/2




                     105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He further submits

                     that the petitioner is merely a driver of the said truck and he was

                     unaware of the illicit consignment kept in the truck. Moreover, a

                     statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner

                     has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial

                     custody since 24.03.2026.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                     petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                     bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

                     of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

                     Exclusive Special Excise-II, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection

                     with Mahua Excise P.S. Case No. 59 of 2026.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.