Patna High Court
Amin Kumar @ Amin YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Amin Kumar, was implicated in a case (Chautham P.S. Case No. 138 of 2026) for alleged involvement in the illegal storage and trade of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. A police raid on a co‑accused’s house led to the seizure of 99.75 litres of foreign liquor and an Alto car, but no direct material linked the petitioner to the contraband except the co‑accused’s disclosure. The petitioner argued that the investigation failed to comply with Sections 103 and 105 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and that the evidence did not satisfy the rigors of Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The State opposed bail, citing five prior similar convictions. The Court, after considering the lack of substantive evidence and procedural lapses, granted bail on condition of a Rs.20,000 bond with two sureties, one of whom must be a close relative, and subject to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner’s arrest and continued detention are justified in the absence of material directly linking him to the seized liquor.
- Whether the investigation complied with the procedural requirements of Sections 103 and 105 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the evidentiary standards prescribed under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, have been met.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior convictions warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 105, 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 76(2)
Subjects
- bail
- illicit liquor
- prohibition law
- procedural compliance
- prior convictions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40502 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2026 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
======================================================
Amin Kumar @ Amin Yadav, S/O Late Gulo Yadav, Resident of Village-
Khutiya, P.S.- Mansi, District- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Amit Prakash, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M. K. Nirala, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 01-07-2026 Heard Mr. Binod Kumar, learned Advocate for the
petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 138 of 2026 registered
for the offences under Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act.
3. Acting on a tip off regarding trade and storage of
illicit liquor, the police conducted raid in the house of one
Deepak Kumar and apprehended him, however, noticing the
police party, two accused persons succeeded in fleeing away. In
course of search, an Alto Car, bearing registration no.
BR1AB0283, parked outside his house, was also seized from
which altogether 99.75 litres of Indian made foreign liquor was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40502 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
2/3
recovered.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
save and except the disclosure made by the apprehended person,
there is no other material suggesting the complicity of the
petitioner in the crime. Even as per the allegation levelled in the
F.I.R., the entire recovery has been made from the possession of
the co-accused Deepak Kumar. The petitioner has neither any
concern with the co-accused Deepak Kumar nor with the seized
Alto car wherefrom the alleged illicit liquor was recovered.
Only on account of the criminal antecedent, as has been
disclosed in para.3 of the petition, the name of the petitioner has
been implicated in the present case. There is no compliance of
Sections 103 and 105 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, as neither the independent witness nor the
Audio/video recording has been done in terms of the mandate of
the aforesaid statutory provisions. The materials available on
record also does not attract rigors provided under Section 76(2)
of the of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State
opposes the bail application and submits that the petitioner is
carrying five criminal antecedent over his head of identical
nature.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40502 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
3/3
6. Regard being had to the submissions advanced by
the learned Advocate for the parties and considering the
materials available on record, especially the fact that save and
except the disclosure made by the co-accused, no other material
has surfaced to suggest the complicity of the petitioner in the
crime, besides the lack of cogent material, which attracts the
rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, let the petitioner, named above, in
the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within
four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this
order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special
Judge Excise-I, Khagaria in connection with Chautham P.S.
Case No. 138 of 2026, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors
shall be the own/close relative of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
uday/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.