Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ambika Sah @ Amika SahversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Ambika Sah, was arrested on 19 April 2026 in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 for alleged possession of 30 litres of illicit country-made liquor seized from a bamboo orchard. The petitioner claimed a clean antecedent and argued that the seizure was not from his conscious possession, asserting that he was implicated merely on suspicion. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Court considered the lack of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the seized liquor and his claim of false implication. It ordered the release of the petitioner on bail of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses, and verification of criminal antecedent. The bail bond was to be accepted without delay for verification purposes.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
  • Whether the mere suspicion and lack of direct recovery from the petitioner’s possession justify bail.
  • Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the trial process.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • prohibition
  • excise
  • illicit liquor
  • Section 30(a)
  • Bihar
  • criminal antecedent
  • suspicion
  • court conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39335 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2026 Thana- Excise Mashrakh District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Ambika Sah @ Amika Sah S/o Late Inar Sah @ Late Iner Sah Resident of
                 Village - Repura, P.S.- Marhowrah (Marhaura), District - Saran at Chapra

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-06-2026                        Heard Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh,                       learned

                   counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ramesh Chandra, learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   19.04.2026 in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 51 of

                   2026, F.I.R. dated 18.04.2026 for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

                               3. Recovery is of 30 liters of illicit 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

                   recovered from the conscious possession of petitioner rather the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39335 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
                                            2/3




          recovery has been made from the Bamboo Orchard and the

          petitioner has been made accused merely on the basis of

          suspicion and except the suspicion nothing has come during

          investigation, which suggest the involvement of petitioner in the

          present offence. The petitioner is in custody since 19.04.2026.

                      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 3rd

          Exclusive Special Excise Court, Saran at Chapra in connection

          with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 51 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, 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.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39335 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
                                                         3/3




                                    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 her

                       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


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.