Patna High Court
Md. Sonu @ Mohammad SonuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail, subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Sonu, a truck driver, was arrested on 25 April 2026 for alleged contravention of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 after 345.6 litres of foreign liquor were seized from his truck and 43.2 litres from a tote. He contended that the liquor was not in his conscious possession and that he was falsely implicated, citing a clean antecedent and alleged non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The High Court, after considering the facts, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions such as presence in court, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The order directed that bail not be delayed for antecedent verification.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
- Whether seizure of liquor from the vehicle without proof of conscious possession justifies continued detention.
- Whether alleged non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS affects the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 — s. 30
- BNSS — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- bail
- prohibition law
- excise
- foreign liquor
- driver
- seizure
- conscious possession
- Section 30
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37633 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2026 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Md. Sonu @ Mohammad Sonu Son of Late Mumtaj @ Late Md. Mumtaj @
Md. Mumtaj Resident of Birmapatti, P.S.- Khampar, District - Deoria (U.P.)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amar Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 Heard Mr. Amar Kumar Singh, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
25.04.2026 in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 132 of
2026, F.I.R. dated 24.04.2026 for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of 345.6 liters of foreign liquor from a
truck and 43.2 liters of foreign liquor from toto.
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
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37633 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
the recovery has been made from truck and toto in question and
the petitioner has been made accused merely on the ground that
he is the driver of the truck in question and the petitioner has no
knowledge about the illicit liquor kept in the truck. He further
submits that there is non-compliance of Section 103 and 105 of
BNSS. The petitioner is in custody since 25.04.2026.
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)-I, Samastipur in connection with
Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 132 of 2026, subject to the following
conditions:-
i. One of the bailor shall be close relative (father or
mother) of the petitioner.
ii. 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37633 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
iii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iv. 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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.