Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17631 (PAT)

Payal Bhagat v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./37287/2026 · 2026-06-09

Smt Soni Shrivastava

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37287 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2026 Thana- PIPRIYA District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== 1. Payal Bhagat S/o Late Ram Chandra Bhagat Resident of Village - Pathua, P.S. - Pipariya, District - Lakhisarai. 2. Uday Bhagat @ Ram Uday Bhagat S/o Late Ram Chandra Bhagat Resident of Village - Pathua, P.S. - Pipariya, District - Lakhisarai. 3. Gulshan Rajak S/o Late Bachkunth Rajak @ Bachkund Rajak Resident of Village - Pathua, P.S. - Pipariya, District - Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rabi Bhushan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 2 09-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022. 3. There is recovery of 45 liters of country made liquor, some plastic jerkins along with gas cylinder and stove from a place near semi-constructed temple. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is evident that the recovery has been made from a place which is accessible to all, as such, no liability can be fixed on the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37287 of 2026(2) dt.09-06-2026 2/3 petitioners. There is no independent witness to the search and seizure and the mandatory provisions have been violated. There is no recovery from the personal and conscious possession of the petitioners. Petitioner nos. 1 and 3 have no criminal antecedents. The petitioners are in custody since 18.04.2026. 5. Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioner no. 2 has two criminal antecedent out of which one is of similar nature. 6. In response, it is submitted that the petitioner no. 2 is on bail in both the cases. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the recovery has been made from a place which is accessible to all and there is no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioners, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VII-cum-Special Excise Court No. 2, Lakhisarai/concerned Court below in connection with Pipariya P.S. Case No. 32 of 2026, subject to conditions that:- (i) One of the bailors shall be a family member/close relative. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37287 of 2026(2) dt.09-06-2026 3/3 (ii) The petitioners shall cooperate in the investigation and trial. priyanka/- (Soni Shrivastava, J) U T