Patna High Court
Rahul Kumar RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to bond and conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar Rai, was arrested in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 17.625 litres of liquor recovered from an open area behind his house. He contended that he was falsely implicated, no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and the recovery was from a public place, also noting the lack of compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s two prior criminal antecedents. The Court examined the facts, the period of custody since 3 December 2025, and the absence of direct incriminating evidence against the petitioner. Considering these circumstances, the Court inclined to grant bail, imposing a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and conditions regarding family surety and regular appearance in court. The bail order was issued subject to cancellation if the petitioner defaults on two consecutive appearances.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act given the facts of the case
- Whether the lack of compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, affects the grant of bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- prohibition law
- excise
- criminal procedure
- section 30(a)
- Bihar
- court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5066 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-360 Year-2025 Thana- PARSA District- Saran
======================================================
Rahul Kumar Rai Son of Baleshwar Rai Resident of Village- Anjani Mathiya,
P.S.- Parsa, District- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Shweta Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Parsa
P.S. Case No. 360/2025 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 17.625
litres of liquor has been recovered behind the house of the
petitioner.
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 rather the recovery has been made
from an open place which is accessible to public at large. The
petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5066 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
2/2
liquor. The petitioner is in custody since 03.12.2025 and has two
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 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 Parsa P.S. Case No.
360/2025, 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.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…