Patna High Court
Gulshan Kumar @ GoluversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that, in the absence of cogent material attracting Section 76(2) and given the lack of any direct link between the petitioner and the seized liquor, bail must be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Gulshan Kumar, was implicated in a case concerning the illegal trafficking of illicit liquor under Sections 30(a), 33 and 34 of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 after a police raid recovered 163.5 litres of foreign liquor from a vehicle. Two arrested individuals named the petitioner among seven alleged traffickers, but the petitioner asserted that he neither owned the vehicle nor had any connection to the seized liquor, and that the investigation lacked material sufficient to invoke Section 76(2) of the Bihar Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s two prior criminal records, including one under the Excise Act. The Court examined the submissions and found no cogent evidence linking the petitioner to the offence, nor any violation of the procedural safeguards under Section 76(2). Consequently, the Court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with specified conditions, invoking Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether the material disclosed by the apprehended persons is sufficient to attract the rigors of Section 76(2) of the Bihar Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita in the bail context
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail
- Whether procedural violations in the search and seizure warrant denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 103, 105, 76(2)
- Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a), 33, 34
Subjects
- bail
- excise law
- illicit liquor trafficking
- search and seizure
- Section 76(2)
- procedural violation
- criminal antecedents
- Indian criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35354 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-240 Year-2026 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN District-
Aurangabad
======================================================
Gulshan Kumar @ Golu S/o Mukesh Singh Resident of Aurangabad, Gaytri
Path Viman School ke Pas, P.S.- Town, District - Aurangabad (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 01-06-2026 Heard Mr. Devesh Kumar Singh, learned Advocate
for the petitioner and Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, learned
Additional Public Prosecution for the State through virtual
mode.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Town P.S. Case No. 240 of 2026, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 33, 34 of the Bihar
Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. The police on a tip of trafficking of illicit wine,
conducted raid and intercepted one XUV-500 bearing
registration no. UP-16AP-8303 and apprehended two persons.
On search, total 163.5 litres Indian made foreign liquor was
recovered. The apprehended persons disclosed the name of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35354 of 2026(2) dt.01-06-2026
2/3
seven persons as a trafficker of the illicit wine including the
name of the petitioner, who is before this Court.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
except the disclosure made by the apprehended persons, the
petitioner is neither the owner of the vehicle in question, nor he
has any connection with the alleged recovered illicit wine. The
materials collected during the course of investigation do not
attract the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the B.N.S.S.,
beside there is further violation of Sections 103 and 105 of the
B.N.S.S. The name of the petitioner is said to have been
implicated only on account of two criminal antecedents out of
which, one has concerned with Excise Act.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the
petitioner bears two criminal antecedents and his name has been
disclosed by the apprehended persons and as such, his
complicity cannot be denied.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note
of the fact that the petitioner has neither any concern with the
vehicle in question from where recovery has been made, nor
there is any cogent material attracting the rigors provided under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35354 of 2026(2) dt.01-06-2026
3/3
Section 76(2) of the Excise Act, as well as serious defiance in
search and seizure, let the petitioner above named be released
on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court
below within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District
& Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Exclusive Special Judge,
Excise Court No. I, Aurangabad in connection with Town P.S.
Case No. 240 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down in
Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the
own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
sadique/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.