IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35665 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2026 Thana- PATAHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Niraj Kumar Son of Ranjit Sahani Resident of Village - Parshouni Kapoor, P.S.- Patahi, District - East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 02-06-2026 Heard Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Madan Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecution for the State through virtual mode. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 102 of 2026, registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. 3. Acting on a tip off, regarding illegal purchase and sell of illicit wine from a cow shed, the police conducted raid, however, noticing the police party, one person succeeded in fleeing away which was later on identified as the petitioner by the local chowkidar. In course of search, total 31.500 litres of Nepali liquor was recovered. 4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35665 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026 2/3 petitioner has no concern with the cow shed from where the alleged recovery has been made, only on account of suspicion, the name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the B.N.S.S., in as much as, the witnesses are non else but the police personnel. Since, no recovery has been made from the conscious or constructive possession of the petitioner and as such, the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act is not attracted; the petitioner also bears fair antecedent. 5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the recovery from the cow shed of the petitioner clearly suggest his complicity; besides, there is express bar to maintain anticipatory bail under Section 76(2) of the Excise Amendment Act. 6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that the alleged recovery has been made from a cow shed, which is an open place, easily accessible to all and moreover, as per the submission of the petitioner, it doesn’t belong to him; besides, the fair antecedent and absence of the ingredients which attract the rigors provided under Section Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35665 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026 3/3 76(2) of the Excise Amendment Act, let the petitioner above named 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/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 3, I/c, Civil Court, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 102 of 2026, 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. sadique/- (Harish Kumar, J) U T