Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Jay Prakash Gupta @ Loli GuptaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, finding that the recovery of illicit liquor was not made from his physical possession.

Summary

The petitioner, Jay Prakash Gupta, was implicated in a case of illegal liquor trade under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022, based solely on a statement by his driver, with no material recovered from his possession. The FIR did not name him, and the seizure list lacked independent witness corroboration. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing lack of direct involvement, while the State opposed the relief. The court examined the prima facie evidence and noted the absence of physical possession by the petitioner. Consequently, the court directed that the petitioner be released on bail upon surrender within four weeks, subject to a bond and sureties, invoking Sections 438(2) of the CrPC and 482(2) of the BNSS. The order effectively granted anticipatory bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail is warranted when the accused is not named in the FIR and no material is recovered from his possession.
  • Whether the disclosure statement of the driver suffices to implicate the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • illicit liquor
  • excise law
  • FIR
  • bail
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34290 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2026 Thana- DURGAWATI District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
                 ======================================================
                 Jay Prakash Gupta @ Loli Gupta, S/o Surendra Prasad, Resident of Village-
                 Usari, P.S.- Mohania, Dist.- Kaimur (Bhabua)

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sarfraz Ahmad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   29-06-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The accused/petitioner is not named in the FIR

                   and apprehending his arrest in connection with Durgawati

                   P.S. Case No.31 of 2026 registered under Section 30(a) of

                   the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022.

                                3. Allegation against the petitioner is to engage in

                   illegal trade/manufacturing of illicit liquor, where there is

                   recovery of 121.280 litres of IMFL/country-made liquor.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for

                   the petitioner that the alleged recovery was made from a

                   Swift Desire Car bearing Registration No. UP11R6021. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34290 of 2026(3) dt.29-06-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner has been implicated as an accused solely on the

          disclosure statement made by his driver Pawan Kumar, who

          was apprehended on the spot. It is submitted that nothing

          has been recovered from the conscious possession of the

          petitioner. It is further submitted that the seizure list

          appears doubtful being not supported by independent

          witnesses rather than by police personnel. The petitioner has

          three criminal antecedent in which, he is on bail.

                       5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of anticipatory

          bail to the petitioner.

                       6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by

          taking of note of fact as recovery of illicit liquor prima facie

          not appears to be made from physical possession of this

          petitioner, accordingly, the petitioner, above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a

          period of four weeks from today, is directed to be released

          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 Special Judge, Excise-II, Kaimur

          at Bhabua in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No.31 of
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34290 of 2026(3) dt.29-06-2026
                                                         3/3




                       2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

                       438(2) of the CrPC/under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.


                                                         (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
    Raushan/-

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.