Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 74466 (PAT)

Rajesh Ray @ Rajesh Kumar Ray @ Rajesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./64615/2025 · 2025-09-24

Harish Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64615 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2025 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL District- Samastipur ====================================================== Rajesh Ray @ Rajesh Kumar Ray @ Rajesh Kumar S/o Late Gulaten Ray @ Late Golten Ray Resident of Village- Pokhraira, P.S.- Samastipur Muffasil, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mahendra Pratap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 24-09-2025 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 257 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. 3. The police, on a secret information, conducted raid and recovered 24 litres of illicit wine from the bath room constructed on the petitioner’s land. 4. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that from the search and seizure memo., it is evident that the alleged recovery has been made from a bath room which was constructed outside the house of the petitioner and easily accessible to all. In fact, the bath room in question from Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64615 of 2025(2) dt.24-09-2025 2/3 which it is said that the recovery has been made is an abandoned bath room situated in an open place falling under the share of all the co-parceners and, as such, the petitioner cannot be held responsible for any recovery. More over, the petitioner is a man of fair antecedent and the witnesses to the search and seizure are none else but the police personnels which also smacks mala fide. The petitioner undertakes that he will fully co-operate in the proceeding of the Court. 5. Learned advocate for the State opposed the bail application and submits that the recovery from the bath room of the petitioner clearly attracts the rigours provided under Section- 76(2) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. 6. Having considered the submissions advanced and taking note of the fact that recovery has been made from a bath room which falls within the share of all the joint co-parceners coupled with the fair antecedent and the infirmities in the search and seizure, let the petitioner abovenamed 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 amount each to the satisfaction of the Exclusive Court of learned Special Judge Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64615 of 2025(2) dt.24-09-2025 3/3 Excise-I, Samastipur in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 257 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. K.C.Jha/- (Harish Kumar, J) U T