Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Raj Kumar RamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail is granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, and conditions of cooperation and familial bailor.

Summary

The petitioner, Raj Kumar Ram, was arrested in connection with an alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the recovery of 140 litres of country‑made liquor from a public place. He contended that the liquor was not in his conscious or physical possession and that the seizure violated mandatory procedural requirements because there was no independent witness to the seizure list. The State opposed bail, citing a prior similar offence, while the petitioner asserted that he was already on bail in the same case. The Court examined the facts, noted the non‑compliance with seizure provisions, and considered the prior antecedent. It ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation with the investigation and that one bailor be a family member. The bail order was pronounced on 10‑06‑2026.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted when the seizure of liquor did not comply with mandatory procedural requirements.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of a similar nature warrants denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • seizure procedure
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • illegal liquor
  • mandatory procedural compliance
  • prior conviction

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32995 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2026 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Raj Kumar Ram S/O Late Bitthal Ram R/O Vill.- Sadikpur Domekhana, P.S.-
                 Alamganj, District- Patna.                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar.                              ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms. Ayushi Gupta, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mrs. Sucheta Yadav, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-06-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State through virtual mode.

                              2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

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

                   and Excise Act.

                              3. Perusal of the first information report and the seizure

                   list would go to show that 140 liters of country made liquor is

                   said to have been recovered from a public place.

                               4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

                   that there is no recovery from the conscious or physical

                   possession of the petitioner. The place of recovery is an open

                   place and easily accessible to anyone, hence no liability can be

                   fixed on the petitioner. There is violation of the mandatory

                   provisions of the search and seizure as there is no independent

                   witness to the seizure list. Petitioner has been languishing in

                   custody since 15.03.2026.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32995 of 2026(3) dt.10-06-2026
                                                        2/2




                                          5.     Learned APP for the State opposes the bail

                      petition on the ground that petitioner has one criminal

                      antecedent of similar nature of the offence. In response, it is

                      submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is on bail in the said

                      case.

                                   6.      Taking     into    consideration     the      fact   and

                      circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that there

                      is non-compliance of mandatory provisions of seizure, the

                      above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail 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 Court below where the case is pending/successor Court

                      in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No. 246 of 2026, subject

                      to the further condition that:

                                   (i)         The   petitioner      shall   cooperate     in   the

                      investigation/trial.

                                   (ii)        The one of the bailors will be a family

                      member/close relative.


                                                  (Soni Shrivastava, J)

Trivedi/-
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.