Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Ram @ Rohit Raut v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4959 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-206 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Ram @ Rohit Raut Son of Binod Raut @ Vinod Ravat @ Bhagnarayan Sahani Resident of Village- Begampur, Balkhana, Ward No. 33, P.S.- Town, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-01-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 60 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4959 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026 2/2 house was within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of local person but then it is submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation and the petitioner is in custody since 17.10.2025.

4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Town P.S. Case No.206/2025.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T