Patna High Court
Jafar AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as he has a clean antecedent and was implicated only on the basis of ownership of the tempo.
Summary
Jafar Alam, the owner of a tempo, was arrested on 9 April 2026 after 90.78 litres of foreign liquor were recovered from the vehicle and its driver, Mukhtsar, was also apprehended. He was charged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act, 2016. The petitioner argued that he has a clean criminal record and was implicated solely because he owns the tempo, having no knowledge of the illicit liquor. The State opposed bail, but the court considered the lack of prior convictions and the factual circumstances. The court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence, and ordered verification of his antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the owner of a vehicle from which illicit liquor is recovered can be granted bail when the alleged offence is under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether mere ownership of the tempo, without knowledge of the liquor, suffices to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioner's clean antecedent warrants bail despite the seriousness of the offence.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- bail
- Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- foreign liquor
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- excise law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37394 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-368 Year-2025 Thana- JOKIHAT District- Araria
======================================================
Jafar Alam S/o Israil @ Md. Israil Resident of Roopauli, Rupaili, Ward No.-
4, P.S.- Araria (R.S.), District - Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md Naushaduzzoha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 Heard Mr. Md Naushaduzzoha, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
09.04.2026, in connection with Jokihat P.S. Case No. 368 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 12.11.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition & Excise
Act, 2016.
3. Recovery is of 90.78litres of foreign liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that it
appears from the F.I.R. that recovery has been made from the
Tempo in question and the driver namely, Mukhtsar was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37394 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
apprehended along with the illicit liquor and petitioner has been
made accused in the present case merely on the ground that the
petitioner is the owner of the Tempo in question. He further
submits that petitioner has no concern at all with the alleged
recovery of illicit liquor and he has no knowledge that co-
accused person, namely, Mukhtsar is carrying the liquor in
question. The petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and he
has been made accused in the present case merely on the ground
that he is the owner of the Tempo in question, let the petitioner,
above named, 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 learned Exclusive Special
Judge Excise-II, Araria in connection with Jokihat P.S. Case No.
368 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-
(1) 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37394 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) 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 antecedents, 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)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.