Dismissed¶21

Abhay Shankar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Oct 2025CR. MISC./55701/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Cr. Misc. No. 55701 of 2025; Sunil Dutta Mishra, J; decided 16-10-2025; Abhay Shankar v. The State of Bihar; regular bail rejected; Patna Excise P.S. Case No. 963 of 2025; Sections 30(a), 30(g), 32, 62, 56(b) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act; prohibited Codeine Cough Syrup; recovery of 1552 litres; M/s Vinay Road Lines Transport Company; Munshi; commercial nature; chargesheet filed; custody since 14.06.2025; no criminal antecedent.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the huge recovery of prohibited Codeine Cough Syrup, the Court was not inclined to grant regular bail; the petitioner's prayer for regular bail was rejected. ¶21

Abhay Shankar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55701 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-963 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Abhay Shankar S/O Sanjeevan Singh, Resident of Vill.-Mahammadpur, P.S.Didarganj, P.O.-Kothia, Dist.- Patna

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER

¶9

5 16-10-2025

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶11

A.P.P. for the State.

¶12

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

¶13

Patna Excise P.S. Case No. 963 of 2025 registered under Sections 30(a), 30(g), 32, 62 and 56(b) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, on secret information that in the godown of the M/s Vinay Road Lines Transport Company, prohibited Codeine Cough Syrup has been stored and activity of sale and purchase is being done, police conducted raid at the said place from where 1552 litres of prohibited Codeine Cough Syrup were recovered and the petitioner being the Munshi of the said company was apprehended from the

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55701 of 2025(5) dt.16-10-2025 2/3

¶16

place of occurrence.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case being the Munshi of the store room/godown engaged for monthly salary. Further submission is that the transport company is engaged in the business of transporting medical and other supplies to different parts of the country and being the Munshi , petitioner has no concern with the seized items and the same do not belong to the petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that the police has not made accused the supplier and transporter of the prohibited Codeine Cough Syrup. It is also submitted that the seized items have been brought in this State after payment of applicable taxes and no offence has been committed by the petitioner. Petitioner is not involved in the illegal trade of prohibited Codeine Cough Syrup. The chargesheet has already been submitted after completion of investigation and there is no chance of absconding of the petitioner or tampering with the evidence. Petitioner is in custody since 14.06.2025 having no criminal antecedent and he undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶18

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55701 of 2025(5) dt.16-10-2025 3/3

¶20

regular bail and submits that petitioner is a Munshi of the company from where huge recovery of prohibited Codeine Cough Syrup has been made which is commercial in nature.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the huge recovery of prohibited Codeine Cough Syrup, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for regular bail is, hereby, rejected.

¶22

(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)

¶23

utkarsh/-

¶24

U T

Abhay Shankar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhay Shankar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rogi Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Shahjad Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Saurabh Kumar @ Raja Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Vs The State of Bihar

Suresh Ray @ Chhota Golu Vs The State of Bihar

Surendra Mandal Vs The State of Bihar