Patna High Court
Bablu PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner, as mere owner of a rented tempo with no evidence of conscious or constructive possession, is not subject to the rigors of Section 76(2) and is entitled to bail under Section 482(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Bablu Paswan, applied for pre‑arrest bail after his tempo was seized by police during a raid that uncovered 77.76 litres of foreign liquor, leading to a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Paswan argued that he was merely the owner of a vehicle that was being rented for passenger transport and had no knowledge of its use for illicit purposes, asserting that neither conscious nor constructive possession could be established against him. He further contended that Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, which imposes stringent bail conditions, was inapplicable, and raised concerns about violations of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS. The State opposed the bail, seeking to maintain the presumption of involvement due to ownership of the vehicle. The Court, after considering the submissions, found no cogent material linking Paswan directly to the contraband and held that the stringent provisions of Section 76(2) did not apply, granting him bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The order required a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and stipulated that one bailor be a close family member.
Issues considered
- Whether the owner of a vehicle used by others for transporting illicit liquor can be deemed to have conscious or constructive possession under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the stringent bail provisions of Section 76(2) apply in the absence of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the contraband.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 76(2)
- BNSS — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- constructive possession
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
- excise law
- vehicle ownership liability
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43997 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2026 Thana- Karnamepur District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Bablu Paswan, Son of Lalji Paswan Resident Of Village- Khutaha Ramdatahi
P S- Karnamepur (Shahpur), District -Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bibhakar Tiwary, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Karnamepur P.S. Case No. 11 of 2026, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The police in course of patrolling duty intercepted
an electric tempo and apprehended two persons, who were
riding thereon. In course of search, total 77.76 liters Indian
made foreign liquor was recovered.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
the name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case only
on account of the fact that the petitioner being owner of the
tempo, in question. In fact, the vehicle was being run on rent
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43997 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/3
for carrying passengers and the petitioner was not aware as to
whether his tempo has ever been used for illicit purpose. It is
further contended that nothing has been recovered from the
conscious and constructive possession of the petitioner and, as
such, the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act is not applicable. Moreover, there is
defiance of statutory provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of the
BNSS. It is lastly contended that the petitioner bears fair
antecedent.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
opposed the pre-arrest bail application.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on
behalf of the parties and considering the submissions advanced
by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
the fact that the name of the petitioner has been implicated only
by virtue of he being owner of the tempo, in question, which
was being run on rent for carrying passenger and further there is
no cogent materials attracting the rigors provided under Section
76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, let the petitioner
above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43997 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
3/3
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Court of Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 2, Bhojpur at Ara
in connection with Karnamepur P.S. Case No. 11 of 2026,
subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further
condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family
members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.