Patna High Court
Prashant Kumar singhversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RITESH KUMAR
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Prashant Kumar Singh, sought bail after being implicated in a case where 108 litres of illicit Nepali liquor were seized from an E‑Rickshaw he owned. The police seized the liquor during a raid based on an informant’s tip, arresting a co‑accused, Mohammad Alam, who disclosed the ownership of the vehicle. The petitioner claimed he merely leased the E‑Rickshaw to Alam for his livelihood and had no knowledge of the liquor, asserting a clean antecedent. The State opposed bail, arguing ownership linked the petitioner to the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. The court, noting the petitioner’s lack of possession and clean record, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being the owner of the vehicle from which illicit liquor was seized
- Whether ownership of the vehicle establishes participation in the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- bail
- illicit liquor
- prohibition act
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- section 30(a)
- section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35828 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2025 Thana- RAHIKA District- Madhubani
======================================================
Prashant Kumar Singh Son of Brij Kishor singh @ Vrij kumar singh Resident
of village -Dumari P.S -Rahika District -Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 26-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Rahika P.S. Case No. 191 of 2025 for allegedly having
committed offence under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and
Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged
on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, to
the effect that on 22.08.2025, while the informant was on
patrolling duty with police personnel, she got a secret
information that one Mohammad Alam was selling illicit liquor
on an E-Rickshaw. To verify the authenticity of the said
information, the informant along with the police personnel
reached the place of occurrence. Upon seeing the police party,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35828 of 2026(2) dt.26-05-2026
2/4
one person started fleeing away, however on chase, the said
person was apprehended, who disclosed his name as
Mohammad Alam and thereafter the E-Rickshaw was seized
from which total 108 litres of Nepali liquor was recovered. On
the disclosure made by the arrested person, the police also went
to seize one another E-Rickshaw, however upon seeing the
police party, one person managed to escape. From the another
E-Rickshaw, total 133 litres of the illicit Nepali liquor was also
seized. Total seizure was made to the tune of 241 litres.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence.
The name of the petitioner has transpired in the present case,
since he happens to be the owner of one E-Rickshaw from
which 108 litres of illicit Nepali liquor is alleged to have been
seized. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the petitioner had given the E-Rickshaw in question to co-
accused, Mohammad Alam for running the same and the
petitioner used to collect daily amount from him. The petitioner
has got no knowledge about the storage of illicit liquor on the
said E-Rickshaw and the petitioner is running E-Rickshaw for
his livelihood. He further submits that the petitioner has got a
clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35828 of 2026(2) dt.26-05-2026
3/4
6. Per contra, the learned APP appearing on behalf of
the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Having considered the rival submissions and after
going through the records, it appears that 108 litres of Nepali
liquor was recovered from the E-Rickshaw, which is said to be
owned by the petitioner. The petitioner was not present at the
place of occurrence and his name transpired in the present case,
since he was the owner of the one of the E-Rickshaw. The
petitioner has got a clean antecedent and nothing has been
recovered from his possession.
Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks, 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 Exclusive
Special Judge Excise, Madhubani in connection with Rahika
P.S. Case No.191 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S with a further condition
that:-
The learned court concerned shall 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35828 of 2026(2) dt.26-05-2026
4/4
court concerned shall take steps for cancellation of bail bond of
the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of
the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of
or in the name of verification.
(Ritesh Kumar, J.)
Sanjay/Pallavi
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.