Gyaneshwar Kumar @ Mangaru @ Gyaneshwar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31215 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2025 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Gyaneshwar Kumar @ Mangaru @ Gyaneshwar, S/o Baiju Singh, R/o Village- Mandaidih, P.S.- Patepur, Dist.- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-05-2025 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 74 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is of involved in trade of illicit wine. The police in course of vehicle checking intercepted a pick-up van and apprehended the driver Sonu Kumar. In course of search, total 1305 litres of Indian made foreign liquor was recovered. The apprehended co-accused disclosed the name of petitioner and others as liquor dealer.
4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31215 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025 2/3 petitioner taking this Court through the FIR contended that save and except the disclosure made by the apprehended person that too before the police, there is no other material suggesting the complicity of petitioner in crime. There is various other infirmities in the search and seizure, coupled with noncompliance of Section 103 and 105 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. In fact, the reason for false implication of the petitioner is said to be one criminal antecedent of identical nature. The petitioner has neither any concern with the pick-up van in question, nor with the illicit wine.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the alleged recovery has been made from a pick-up van and save and except the disclosure made before the police, there is no material attracting the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31215 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise, First, Samastipur in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 74 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U T