Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sikandar Kumar @ Hira Lal @ Sikandra KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted on the condition of a Rs. 10,000 bond with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Sikandar Kumar, was charged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 200 litres of liquor and 200 litres of jawa mahua from a forest, which were destroyed at the spot. The petitioner was not arrested at the scene and no liquor was found in his possession. Counsel argued that the alleged recovery occurred in a public area, that the petitioner was implicated by locals without proper investigation, and that he had been in custody since 22-12-2025 without sufficient evidence. The court considered these submissions and found no compelling reason to deny bail. Accordingly, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the same amount.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to an accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act when the alleged contraband was not recovered from his possession
  • Whether the circumstances of the arrest and lack of direct evidence justify continued custody

Subjects

  • bail
  • excise law
  • Section 30(a)
  • Bihar Excise Act
  • criminal procedure
  • custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6249 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-317 Year-2025 Thana- CHAKAND District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Sikandar Kumar @ Hira Lal @ Sikandra Kumar S/o Late Rambrichh
                 Chaudhary @ Late Rambriksh Chaudhary R/o Village - Madan Bigha, P.S -
                 Chakand, District - Gaya

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Vijay Kumar, Adv
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   31-01-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad.

                             2.    The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise

                   Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 200 litres of liquor from a forest and

                   200 litres of jawa mahua which was destroyed at the spot.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6249 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
                                                          2/2




                        and is accessible to villagers at large and he came to be

                        implicated at the instance of local people or Chowkidar but then

                        it is submitted that if local people or Chowkidar was aware

                        about the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then

                        why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the

                        instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the

                        prosecution. It is further submitted that once an accused is

                        implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts

                        implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar,

                        local person, confessional statement or secret information

                        without holding a proper investigation. It is also submitted that

                        petitioner is in custody since 22-12-2025.

                                 5.     Considering the submission made by learned

                        counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, be

                        released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees

                        Ten 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 Chakand P.S. Case

                        No. 317 of 2025.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.