IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36271 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2026 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Raju Kumar Son of Chandu Rai Resident of Village- Sadikpur, Rukanpura, P.S.- Rupaspur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mickey Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 02-06-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual mode. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No.53 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. 3. In course of patrolling, the police intercepted a scooty and apprehended one Vicky Kumar. On search, total 27.12 liters of Indian Made Foreign Liquor was recovered. The petitioner has been implicated in this case on account of he being the owner of the said vehicle. 4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that admittedly the petitioner was neither present at the place of occurrence nor during the course of investigation any materials Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36271 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026 2/3 have been collected showing his complicity in the crime. Only on account of he being owner of the seized scooty, his name has been implicated in this case. There is no compliance of Section 103 and 105 of the BNSS and moreover the petitioner bears fair antecedent and there is no other ingredients which attract the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (for short ‘the Act, 2016’). 5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the vehicle in question from where recovery has been made belongs to the petitioner and, as such, his complicity in the crime cannot be ruled out. 6. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the vehicle in question was being used by his brother from where recovery has been made, however during the course of investigation no materials have been collected suggesting his complicity, besides his fair antecedent and the absence of materials attracting 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. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36271 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026 3/3 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Excise Judge, Danapur in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No.53 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