Rahul kumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38818 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-398 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Rahul Kumar S/o Umesh Yadav Resident of village- Karma Road Pakaha,
                 P.S- Muffasil, dist- Aurangabad, Bihar.

                                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr.Abhishek Kumar,Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Ms.Anita Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-06-2026                     Heard Mr.Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Ms.Anita Kumari, learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   19.04.2026 in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 398 of

                   2026, F.I.R. dated 18.04.2026 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 30(a),32(3) of Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise Amendment Act.

                                3. Recovery is of 112.500 liters of country made

                   liquor.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

                   submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that

                   altogether 112.500 liters of country made liquor was recovered

                   from the Tempo in question and petitioner was apprehended

                   with the illicit liquor. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38818 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
                                            2/3




          that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present

          case. Petitioner is not the owner of the vehicle in question.

          Petitioner is driver of the vehicle in question and he has no

          concern at all with the alleged recovery of illicit liquor. It

          appears from the FIR as well as the seizure list that the seizure

          list witnesses are Bihar Home Guard personnel, so there is non-

          compliance of the Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023 and the

          petitioner is in custody since 19.04.2026.

                       5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer

          for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries

          three more cases other than the present one but he fairly submits

          that the petitioner is on bail in all the cases, as mentioned in

          para-3 of the bail petition.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid fact, 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 learned Special Judge, Excise-II,

          Aurangabad, Bihar in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 398

          of 2026,with 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
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38818 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
                                                           3/3




                         on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                         reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                      (II) 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.

                                      (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)
Nitesh/-

U          K