Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44718 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2025 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Ranjan Kumar Son of Mahendra Choudhary Village- Khorinpakad, P.S. -Harsidhi, District- East Champaran 2.

Mukesh Kumar Son of Mahendra Choudhary Village- Khorinpakad, P.S. -Harsidhi, District- East Champaran 3.

Sunaina Devi wife of Yogendra Choudhary Village- Khorinpakad, P.S. -Harsidhi, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Prerna Rishi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 16-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in Harsidhi P.S. case No. 232 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that 145 liters liquor and other manufacturing materials are recovered in this case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The petitioners

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44718 of 2025(2) dt.16-07-2025 2/2 have got no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. It is further submitted that recovery is made from the joint house of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 where other family members also reside. The petitioner No. 3 has got no concern with regard to place of recovery. The petitioners are in custody since 27.04.2025 and have got no criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Section 103 of B.N.S.S., 2023.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, clean antecedent and the period of custody undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

7. Let the petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Harsidhi P.S. case No. 232 of 2025.

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