Patna High Court
Subodh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted as the petitioner had no direct possession of the seized liquor and the confessional statement of the co‑accused was not admissible as substantive evidence.
Summary
Subodh Kumar was arrested in connection with offences under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleged to have been involved in the recovery of liquor from a co‑accused and a vehicle. The petitioner, who has five prior cases (three under the Excise Act), argued that he was not arrested at the scene, had no possession of the seized liquor, and had no relationship with the co‑accused Raju Kumar. He further contended that the only link to him was a confessional statement made by Raju Kumar in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s antecedent record. The Court, after considering the submissions, held that the lack of direct possession and the unreliable confessional statement did not justify continued detention, and ordered the petitioner’s release on regular bail with a bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties. The bail application was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite prior cases and the nature of the offences under Section 414 IPC and Section 30(a) Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused, made in police custody, provides sufficient basis to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of direct possession of the seized liquor negates the justification for continued custody.
Legislation cited
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 414
Subjects
- bail
- Section 414 IPC
- Excise Act
- confessional statement
- antecedent cases
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42881 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-258 Year-2021 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Subodh Kumar S/o- Santosh Ray R/village- Dostpur, P.S- Bathnaha, Dist-
Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Section 414 of the I.P.C. and Section
30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of five cases out of which three
cases are under the Excise Act and is in custody since
12.05.2026 and allegation is of recovery of 180ml liquor from
possession of Raju Kumar and 2739.60 litres of liquor from a
truck and a car.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42881 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
2/2
any of the seized vehicles and petitioner has no concern or
relation with Raju Kumar and he came to be implicated based
on confessional statement of Raju in police custody which does
not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that police
in majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at the
behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and
confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding
a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, is
directed to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail-
bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in
connection with Riga P. S. Case No.258 of 2021.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.