Satish Kumar Singh @ Guddu Singh Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Adesh Raj Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 09-07-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 74 of 2025 lodged on 01.05.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(1), 32(2), 36, 41(1) & 41(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

¶14

As per the prosecution, total recovery of 714.240 litres of illicit liquor has been made which is the subject matter of the present case.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that the police has recovered motorcycles and other

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42448 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 2/3

¶17

vehicles from which, different amounts of liquor has been recovered. Counsel also submits that the total recovery in this case is 714.240 litres of liquor, but near the door of petitioner’s poultry farm, only 18 litres of liquor was recovered. Counsel submits that in the last of the FIR, it has been stated that near the door of poultry farm of the petitioner, 18 litres of illicit liquor has been recovered. Counsel submits that the petitioner has not been apprehended from the place of occurrence and his name has figured in this case only due to the reason that such occurrence has been caused near his poultry farm. Counsel submits that the petitioner is a respectable businessman of the locality and he is well aware that in Bihar, business of liquor is completely banned. Counsel submits that some person shall definitely do the crime at the premises of the petitioner and kept the alleged liquor of 18 litres near his poultry farm’s door so that his business shall stop. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

¶18

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner but submits that from the record, it transpires that out of 714.240 litres of liquor, only 18 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from the door of petitioner’s poultry farm. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has also no

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42448 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 3/3

¶20

criminal antecedent.

¶21

As such, in the present facts and circumstances of this case, let the above named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 to the satisfaction of Exclusive Special Excise Judge-I, Samastipur, in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 74 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023.

¶22

(Dr. Anshuman, J)

¶23

Divyansh/-

¶24

U T

Satish Kumar Singh @ Guddu Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Kumar Singh @ Guddu Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bidya Nand Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Chandradev Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Meharuddin Vs The State of Bihar

Mithu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rampravesh Kamat Vs The State of Bihar