Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Dipak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court held that the recovery of illicit liquor does not prima facie establish the petitioner’s conscious possession and therefore granted bail.

Summary

Dipak Kumar Singh was charged under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for allegedly manufacturing and trading illicit liquor, with 1,071.36 litres recovered from his vehicle. He contended that the recovery did not establish his conscious possession and that he had been acquitted in a prior excise case while in judicial custody. The petitioner also argued that his criminal antecedents should not preclude bail, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Prabhakar Tewari v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2020). The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Court examined the facts and, noting the lack of prima facie evidence of possession, granted bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties, invoking Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in the excise case despite the recovery of illicit liquor from his vehicle.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • excise law
  • illicit liquor
  • possession
  • criminal antecedent
  • Section 482
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36721 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-278 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Dipak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Singh Son of Parasnath Yadav Resident of
                 Village- Balesara Tola Jahrule Hatta, P.S.- Uchkagaon, District- Gopalganj.
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar.
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Vyas Kumar Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Sucheta Yadav, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-06-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on

                   behalf of the State.

                                2. The accused/petitioner apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 278 of 2025 registered

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(3) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and            Excise Act, 2016 (Amended 2018 &

                   2022).

                                3. The allegation against the petitioner is to be

                   engaged in illegal trading/manufacturing of illicit liquor, where,

                   there is recovery of 1071.360 litres of IMFL/country made liquor

                   from the vehicle.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner submitted that the present case was lodged on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36721 of 2026(2) dt.08-06-2026
                                            2/3




          25.02.2025, the day on which the petitioner was in judicial

          custody in connection with Mirganj P.S. Case No. 521 of 2024 in

          which he was later on acquitted. It is pointed out that one of the

          reason for suspicion of petitioner is inimical terms with police and

          for that reason he was implicated in 17-18 similar nature of

          cases, where he is on bail. It is pointed out that the implication of

          this petitioner is for the reason that he is the owner of the

          vehicle, from which the foreign liquor was recovered. It is

          submitted that if merit of this case is otherwise convincing in

          favour of petitioner, merely on the basis of his criminal

          antecedent, the bail of petitioner ordinarily should not be

          rejected. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied

          upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as available

          through Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and

          Anr. reported in (2020) 11 SCC 648.

                       5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.

                       6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by

          taking note of fact as the recovery of illicit liquor prima facie not

          appears to be made from the conscious physical possession of

          this petitioner, accordingly, above named petitioner, in the event

          of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court, within a

          period of four weeks of the order, is directed to be released on
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36721 of 2026(2) dt.08-06-2026
                                                          3/3




                        bail 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   Court   No.   II,

                        Muzaffarpur/concerned Court, where the case is pending in

                        connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 278 of 2025, subject to

                        the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.



                                              (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-

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.