Patna High Court
Arun Ram @ Arun KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Arun Ram, was arrested in connection with a case (PS No. 569 of 2025) alleging possession of 100 litres of illicit country‑made liquor, an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The prosecution argued that the liquor was recovered from a plastic sack, but no article was found in the petitioner's conscious possession and the petitioner claimed false implication. The petitioner had been in custody since 1 December 2025 and possessed six prior criminal antecedents, and the prosecution failed to comply with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed bail, but the Court considered the lack of direct evidence, the period of custody already served, and the statutory non‑compliance. Accordingly, the Court granted bail subject to a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering, and territorial restrictions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act given the facts of the case.
- Whether the non‑compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s six prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- prohibition
- excise
- illicit liquor
- Section 30
- Section 103
- criminal antecedents
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4112 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-569 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Arun Ram @ Arun Kumar Son of Acche Lal Ram Resident of Village -
Harajpur, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist. - East Champaran at Motihari.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mrs. Sangeeta Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muffasil
P.S. Case No. 569 of 2025 instituted for the offences punishable
under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that total 100 litres
of illicit country-made liquor has been recovered from plastic
sack.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. No
incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious
possession of the petitioner. Local Chowkidar disclosed the
name of the petitioner. The petitioner has got no concern with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4112 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
the alleged recovery of liquor. The petitioner is in custody since
01.12.2025 and has six criminal antecedents. There is no
compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case as also the period of custody undergone by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing
of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case
No. 569 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the petitioner.
(III) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4112 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(IV) Petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction
of the learned court below without taking prior permission of
the court concerned.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Atul/-
U T
Checking your session…