IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56232 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2026 Thana- DAWATH District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1. Saroj Ram R/o Sheoji Ram @ Shivji Ram Resident of village- Doma Dihari, Ps- Dawath, Dist- Rohtas 2. Vikash Kumar Son of Vidya Sagar Singh R/o Village - Gunsej, P.S. - Dinara, Dist. - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 2 13-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Dawath P.S. Case No. 168 of 2026, G.R. Case No. 546 of 2026 instituted for the offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. 3. The prosecution case, in short, is that 40.140 liters liquor was recovered from auto and a motorcycle and the petitioners were arrested on spot. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating material has been recovered Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56232 of 2026(2) dt.13-08-2026 2/3 from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The petitioners have got no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. It is further submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is the owner-cum- driver of the auto and the petitioner no. 2 has no concern with the alleged vehicles in question. The petitioners had no knowledge regarding the nature of goods kept in the vehicles in question. The petitioners are in custody since 06.06.2026 and have got no criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Section 103 of B.N.S.S., 2023. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner no. 1 is the owner-cum-driver of the auto in question, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner no. 1 after framing of charge. 7. Let the petitioner no. 1 be released on bail, after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Dawath P.S. Case No. 168 of 2026, G.R. Case No. 546 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:- (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56232 of 2026(2) dt.13-08-2026 3/3 the family of the petitioner. (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. 8. So far as petitioner no. 2 is concerned, since the petitioner has no concern with the vehicle , this Court is inclined to grant bail to petitioner no. 2. 9. Let the petitioner no. 2 be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Dawath P.S. Case No. 168 of 2026, G.R. Case No. 546 of 2026. saurav/- (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) U T