Patna High Court
Suman Kumar @ Randhir KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Suman Kumar @ Randhir Kumar, was arrested on 3 April 2026 for alleged possession of foreign liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022. The prosecution’s case is based on a tip from an Excise Sub‑Inspector leading to a police raid that recovered a large quantity of liquor and identified the petitioner as one of the persons present. The petitioner contended that he has a clean antecedent, was not involved in the seizure, and that the seizure list was prepared solely by police, violating mandatory provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, 2023. The court examined whether these procedural lapses and the petitioner’s background warranted denial of bail. Concluding that the petitioner is entitled to bail, the court ordered his release on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022.
- Whether non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, 2023, regarding seizure procedures, affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and alleged non‑involvement justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- bail
- excise
- foreign liquor
- seizure procedure
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act
- BNSS
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 30493 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-625 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Suman Kumar @ Randhir Kumar S/o- Late Naval Kishor Ray R/v- Jhakhra
Ps- Karja Dist- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 Heard Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Umanath Mishra, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
3.4.2026 in connection with Muzaffarpur Excise (Utpad) P.S.
Case No. 625 of 2026 for the offence punishable under Section
30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the
informant who is S.I. Excise P.S. Muzaffarpur namely Satish
Kumar has submitted his typed copy of application before
S.H.O. Excise P.S. Muzaffarpur on 2.4.2026 alleging there in
that on 2.4. 2026 he got secret information that in Jhakra village
Under Karja P.S. under the tree and Bushes (Jhari) Suman
Kumar @ Randhir Kumar (Petitioner) Mandhir Kumar werekept
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 30493 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/4
foreigin liquor and store it for distribution. It is further alleged
that on such information he informed to his higher officers and
constitute a raiding team. It is further alleged that he along with
other police persons reached pointed place, seeing the police
two persons wanted to flee one person apprehended by police. It
is further alleged that apprehended person disclosed his name
Suman Kumar Randhir Kumar ( petitioner ) It is further alleged
that on search near Tree, Jhari (Bushes) and from the Tin trunk
Total 345 liters 600 mililiter/foreign liquor was recovered. It is
further alleged that apprehended person disclosed his associates
name is Mandhir Kumar and one Rakesh Kumar. It is further
alleged that in the presence of police as witness seizure list was
prepared.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits petitioner
has clean antecedent and it appears from the FIR and seizure list
that recovery has been made from the bush and the petitioner
has no role at all in the present occurrence and some persons
were arrested from the place of occurrence and petitioner has
disclosed that he was involved in the present crime in question.
It is next submitted that altogether 1345 liters 600
mililiter/foreign liquor was recovered from the place of
occurrence. It is next submitted that from perusal of the seizure
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 30493 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/4
list it appears that the seizure list witnesses are police personnel
so there is non-compliance of mandatory provisions of Sections
103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023 and petitioner is in custody since
3.4.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Judge Excise-II, Muzaffarpur in connection with
Muzaffarpur Excise (Utpad) P.S. Case No. 625 of 2026, subject
to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 30493 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
4/4
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.