Patna High Court

Saroj Yadav @ Saroj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to monetary bond and specific conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Saroj Yadav, was arrested after 40.160 litres of illicit country-made liquor were recovered from a motorcycle, and he was charged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He claimed innocence, stating he did not own the motorcycle, had no prior criminal record, and that the police had no incriminating material in his conscious possession. The State opposed bail, while the petitioner argued that Section 103 of the BNSS, 2023 had not been complied with. The court considered the facts, the period of custody since 26‑11‑2025, and the lack of evidence linking the petitioner directly to the liquor. It decided to grant bail, subject to a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and conditions regarding family surety and regular court appearances.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Whether the non‑compliance of Section 103 of the BNSS, 2023 precludes bail.
Whether the petitioner poses a risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence.

Legislation cited

BNSS, 2023 — s. 103

Subjects

bail
prohibition law
excise
Section 30(a)
Section 103
Bihar
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.870 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2025 Thana- DEODHA District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Saroj Yadav @ Saroj Kumar S/o Late Ram Murti Yadav Resident of Village -
                 Manmohan (Pura), P.S - Basopatti, District - Madhubani
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER
2   19-01-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                           2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Deodha PS

                   Case No. 138 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Section

                   30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                           3. The prosecution case, in short, is that 40.160 liters of

                   country made liquor was recovered from the motorcycle and the

                   petitioner was arrested on the spot.

                           4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

                   present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from

                   the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has got

                   no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. Learned counsel

                   for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not the owner of the

                   said motorcycle and has been implicated in this case by the police
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.870 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     with ulterior motive. The petitioner is in custody since 26.11.2025

                     and has got clean criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of

                     Section 103 of the BNSS, 2023.

                             5. Learned A.P.P. 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 and 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, after framing of

                     charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of

                     Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) with two sureties of the like

                     amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court

                     in connection with Deodha PS Case No. 138 of 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)
Siddharth Soni/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…