Jyotish Paswan @ Jyotish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37455 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2026 Thana- TETERHAT District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Jyotish Paswan @ Jyotish Kumar S/o Late Munshi Paswan Resident of Village- Mahisona, P.S.- Tatarhat, District- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 25.04.2026 in connection with Tetarhat P.S. Case No. 66 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 24.04.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 60 liters of country made liquor.
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 the recovery has been made from the house in question and petitioner is not the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37455 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/3 absolute owner of the said house rather the same is the joint house property of the petitioner. It appears from the seizure list that 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 25.04.2026.
5 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner and apart from that the petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than the present one but fairly submits that he is on bail in the pending matter.
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 District & Additional Sessions Judge VII-cum-Exclusive Special Excise Court-II, Lakhisarai, in connection with Tetarhat P.S. Case No. 66 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37455 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 3/3 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) Vanisha/- U T