Patna High Court

Pankaj Kumar SumanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 4 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar Suman, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case involving the seizure of 590.4 litres of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement of a co‑accused and the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle from which the liquor was recovered. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated, had no direct involvement, and that the prosecution had not complied with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, contending that no prima facie case existed. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the petitioner’s three prior criminal convictions and his ownership of the vehicle. The Court, considering the criminal antecedents and the lack of a prima facie case, declined to grant anticipatory bail, but allowed the petitioner to apply for regular bail if he surrenders within six weeks.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances.
Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the petitioner.
Whether non‑compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, warrants denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail
criminal antecedent
liquor seizure
Section 30
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Section 103
Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6941 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-625 Year-2025 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad
                 ======================================================
                 Pankaj Kumar Suman S/O Suresh Pandey R/O Mohalla- Gandhinagar Road
                 no. 4, Bairiya, Koluha, Police Station- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Sanjay Kumar S.K., Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Ramesh Chandra, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   04-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Madhdumpur P.S. Case No. 625 of 2025, instituted for the

                   offences under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise Act, 2016.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that total 590.4 litres

                   of liquor has been recovered from Pick-up.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The

                   name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of

                   confessional statement of apprehended co-accused Pramod

                   Kumar. The name of the petitioner transpires in this case only

                   on the basis of that he is owner of the alleged vehicle. The
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6941 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                     petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of

                     liquor. The petitioner has three criminal antecedents. There is no

                     compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha

                     Sanhita, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore,

                     contends that prima-facie no case is made out against the

                     petitioner.

                                 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                     opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Petitioner

                     is the registered owner of the vehicle from which huge quantity

                     of liquor has been recovered.

                                   6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                     of the case, taking into account the criminal antecedent of the

                     petitioner, in my view, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail,

                     I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                                   7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory

                     bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

                                   8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the

                     learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and

                     prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own

                     merit without being prejudiced by this order.


                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…