IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35603 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2026 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Santosh Kumar S/o Chhotelal Paswan, R/o Village - Bairiya, Ward no. 16, P.S - Supaul, District - Supaul, Pin - 852131 ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Shubhra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 01-06-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual mode. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No.55 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. 3. Acting upon a tip-off about transportation of illicit wine, the police intercepted a motorcycle. However, noticing the police party, one of the accused persons succeeded in fleeing away. The apprehended person disclosed the name of the petitioner as absconding accused. In course of search, 110 liters of country made liquor were recovered. 4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has neither any concern with the alleged Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35603 of 2026(2) dt.01-06-2026 2/3 motorcycle nor with the recovered illicit wine. Only on account of his past criminal antecedents, as disclosed in para-3 of the bail application, his name has been implicated in this case. Since there is no recovery from the conscious or constructive possession of the petitioner, and in the absence of other materials, the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (for short ‘the Act, 2016’) is also not attracted. There is further defiance of the mandatory provisions as provided under Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS. 5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that, besides the petitioner carrying four criminal antecedents of identical nature, his name has been disclosed by the apprehended person as one of the accomplice. 6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties, and considering the fact that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged motorcycle from which the recovery has been made, besides the fact that during the course of investigation no other materials have been collected suggesting the complicity of the petitioner in the crime, as well as the deficiency pointed out in the search and seizure and the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35603 of 2026(2) dt.01-06-2026 3/3 absence of materials which attract the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the Act, 2016, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No.1, Supaul in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No.55 of 2026, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner. rohit/- (Harish Kumar, J) U T