Sukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30579 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-241 Year-2026 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Sukesh kumar S/O Shri Ram Rai R/O Village- Chetan Chapra, P.S- Baniapur, Distt.- Chapra (Saran).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Harsh Anuj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-05-2026 Heard Mr. Harsh Anuj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 23.03.2026 in connection with Baniapur P.S. Case No. 241 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 19.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Recovery is of 107.4 liters of illicit liquor of different brands.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather on the basis of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30579 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 2/3 secret information the recovery of 107.4 liters of illicit liquor has been made behind the primary school. He further submits that the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of suspicion and his previous criminal antecedents. He next submits that similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Golu Kumar has been granted the privilege of bail by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2026 in Cr. Misc. No. 28691 of 2026. It appears from the seizure list that the seizure list witnesses are the police personnel, so there is non-compliance of Section 103/105 of the BNSS, 2023. The petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2026.

5 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries three criminal antecedents other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail application that the petitioner is on bail in the said matters.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, 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 1st Exclusive Special Excise Judge Saran at Chapra in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30579 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 3/3 with Baniapur P.S. Case No. 241 of 2026 subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers 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 petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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