Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32168 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2025 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Rahul Kumar son of Mahesh Yadav @ Mahesh Kumar village- Teni Bigha PsJehanabad, Dist- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Meena Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 202 of 2025, instituted for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, 87.125 liters liquor was recovered from the house of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. Learned counsel

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32168 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the place of occurrence. The alleged recovery has been made from the joint house of the petitioner. It is further submitted that name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement made by co-accused person and the same has got no evidentiary value. The petitioner is in custody since 18.03.2025 and has got one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik 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. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 202 of 2025.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T