Patna High Court

Mukesh YadavversusThe 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.

Summary

Mukesh Yadav, a driver, was arrested after 161.280 litres of liquor were recovered from a vehicle and he was charged under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He pleaded that he was falsely implicated, was not the owner of the vehicle, had no knowledge of the contraband and possessed no prior criminal record. He further argued that the prosecution had not complied with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed the bail application. Considering the facts, the Patna High Court granted bail on a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions of family surety and regular appearance in court.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of knowledge negates the necessity for pre‑trial detention
Whether non‑compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, warrants denial of bail

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103

Subjects

bail
excise
liquor seizure
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita
false implication
driver
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91430 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1144 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Mukesh Yadav Yugeshwar Yadav @ Jugeshar Yadav R/O Village - Matnag,
                 P.S- Manika, District- Latehar, State- Jharkhand



                                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus


                 The State of Bihar



                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================

                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mrs. Shaheen Begum, 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 JAM

                   P.S. Case No. 1144 of 2025 instituted for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition

                   and Excise Act.

                               3. The prosecution case, in short, is that total 161.280

                   litres of liquor was recovered from car.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. No
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91430 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
                                            2/3




          incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious

          possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted

          that petitioner is not the owner of the vehicle. It is further

          submitted that petitioner is the driver of the vehicle in question

          but he had no knowledge regarding the goods loaded in the

          vehicle. The petitioner is in custody since 21.11.2025 and has no

          criminal antecedent. 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 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 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 JAM P.S. Case No.

          1144 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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91430 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the

                     bail bonds of the petitioner.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…