Lalit Sharma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28719 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2026 Thana- RATANPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.
Lalit Sharma S/o- Sitaram Sharma R/v- Rupauli Punarvas Ward no- 19 PsKunauli District- Supaul 2.
Ganga Kumar Sharma @ Ganga Kumar S/o- Mangen Sharma R/v- Rupauli Punarvas Ward no- 19 Ps- Kunauli District- Supaul 3.
Stya Narayan @ Satya Nr Sharma @ SAtyanarayan Sharma S/o- Dukhi Sharma R/v- Rupauli Punarvas Ward no- 19 Ps- Kunauli District- Supaul 4.
Shravan Kumar @ Sharban Kumar S/o- Mahendra Ram @ Mahindra Ram R/v- Rupauli Punarvas Ward no- 19 Ps- Kunauli District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prasoon Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Sucheta Yadav, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-04-2026 Heard Mr. Prasoon Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Sucheta Yadav, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seeks bail who are in custody since 27.02.2026 in connection with Ratanpur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 27.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
3. Recovery is of 252 liters of Nepali Dilwale Sofi and two mobile phones
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28719 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 2/3 petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion. He next submits that petitioners have no concern at all with the alleged recovery and they have been made accused merely on the basis that they were present at the place of occurrence. He further submits that seizure list witnesses are police personnel and there is non-compliance of Section 103 and 105 of BNSS and the petitioners are in custody since 27.02.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court-II, Supaul in connection with Ratanpur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28719 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 3/3 ii. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T