Patna High Court
Rahul RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the seriousness of the offence and the large quantity of illicit liquor recovered warranted custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Ram, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a case (PS Kuchaikote Case No. 419 of 2022) alleging violation of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for possession of 703.96 litres of illicit liquor. The prosecution’s case was based on the recovery of the liquor from a vehicle and a confessional statement of a co‑accused, while the petitioner claimed innocence, no direct possession, and a clean antecedent. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the large quantity of contraband recovered. The High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding the circumstances serious enough to warrant custody. However, the Court allowed the petitioner to surrender within four weeks, directing the trial court to consider his surrender‑cum‑bail application promptly without prejudice to the rejection of anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged possession of a large quantity of illicit liquor
- Whether the confession of a co‑accused and recovery of liquor from a vehicle suffice to justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illicit liquor
- excise law
- bail jurisprudence
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36078 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-419 Year-2022 Thana- KUCHAIKOTE District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Rahul Ram S/o Sunil Ram @ Yugul Kishore Ram R/o - Kotwa, P.S -
Gopalganj, District - Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 01-06-2026 The Court proceeding is being conducted through
virtual mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P for the State.
3. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 419 of 2022 lodged on
14.09.2022, for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018,
pending in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge-IV
cum Exclusive Special Excise, Court no. II, Gopalganj.
4. As per the prosecution, total recovery of 703.960
litres of illicit liquor has been made, which is the subject matter
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36078 of 2026(2) dt.01-06-2026
2/3
of the present case
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits
that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession
of the petitioner and the alleged recovery has been made from a
car. Counsel further submits that the name of the petitioner has
come in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of
the co-accused. He further submits that the petitioner has clean
antecedent.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that huge quantity of illicit
liquor has been recovered in this case.
7. As such, in the present facts and circumstances, this
Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly,
the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.
8. Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that if he
surrenders before the concerned Trial Court within a period of 4
weeks from today then in that case, the Trial Court is directed to
pass order on his surrender-cum-bail application on the same
day considering that whether ingredients of Excise Act is made
out against petitioner in this case or not, without being prejudice
that the anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been rejected by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36078 of 2026(2) dt.01-06-2026
3/3
this Court and the Trial Court shall pass order on the merit of
this case.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.