Patna High Court
Vinod MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to a bond and specified conditions.
Summary
Vinod Mukhiya was arrested on 11 April 2026 in connection with the seizure of 360 litres of illicit Nepali liquor alleged to be in violation of Sections 32(1) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016. The petitioner claimed he had no ownership or control over the vehicle from which the liquor was recovered and asserted a clean criminal record. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma examined the facts, noted the petitioner’s claim of non‑possession and lack of prior convictions, and ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence. The order also directed verification of the petitioner’s antecedent but stipulated that bail should not be delayed for that purpose.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the alleged offences under Sections 32(1) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016.
- Whether the seizure of illicit liquor can be attributed to the petitioner’s conscious possession.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and claim of non‑ownership of the vehicle justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 — s. 32(1), 32(3)
Subjects
- bail
- excise law
- illicit liquor
- Section 32
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- possession
- seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36825 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2026 Thana- Excise Jhanjharpur District- Madhubani
======================================================
Vinod Mukhiya son of Hari Mukhiya Resident of Village- Birpur, Ps-
Ladaniya, Dist- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Baleshwar Kamat, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 Heard Mr. Baleshwar Kamat, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Shantanu Kumar, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
11.04.2026 in connection with Excise Jhanjharpur P.S. Case No.
77 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 10.04.2026 for the offences punishable
under Sections 32(1) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016.
3. Recovery is of 360 liters of illicit Nepali Mamsari
country made liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears
from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that nothing has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36825 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather
the recovery has been made from the Hyundari I-10 car in
question and petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the
said vehicle. He further submits that the petitioner has no
concern at all from the recovery of the illicit liquor. It appears
from the seizure list that seizure list witnesses are police
personnel. The petitioner is in custody since 11.04.2026.
5 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Judge Excise Act Jhanjharpur, District- Madhubani in
connection with Excise Jhanjharpur P.S. Case No. 77 of 2026
subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36825 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below 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 court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.