Dinanath Kumar @ Dinanath yadav v. The State of Bihar
CR. MISC./29853/2026 · 2026-05-07
Ashok Kumar Pandey
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 16539 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 16539 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29853 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2026 Thana- KHAJAULI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Dinanath Kumar @ Dinanath yadav Son of Ram kripal yadav Resident of village- Kashma Marar P.S -Khajauli District -Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 2 07-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Khajauli P.S. Case No. 82 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. No. 458 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that altogether 135 litres of illicit Nepali country-made liquor was recovered.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29853 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 2/2 petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and the police has not complied with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since
26.03.2026.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise, Madhubani in connection with Khajauli P.S. Case No. 82 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. No. 458 of 2026.
Sudhanshu/- (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) U T