Allowed¶21

Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu Ray v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Dec 2025CR. MISC./84423/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail order, Patna High Court, Crl. Misc. No. 84423 of 2025, dated 04-12-2025, Judge Rudra Prakash Mishra. Petitioner Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu Ray; Excise Danapur PS Case No. 675 of 2025; Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act; alleged recovery of 40 liters country liquor from bush; custody since 11.10.2025; no criminal antecedents; non-compliance of Section 103 BNSS 2023 urged by defence; State opposed through APP. Bail granted on bonds of Rs. 15,000 with two like sureties. No precedent cited; single-judge oral order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner 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 the Court below/concerned Court in connection with Excise Danapur PS Case No. 675 of 2025. ¶21

Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu Ray Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84423 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-675 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE DANAPUR District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu Ray S/O Late Gyani Ray R/O Vill.- Dumariya Anandpur, P.S- Bihta, Dist.- Patna (Bihar)

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 04-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Excise Danapur PS Case No. 675 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Section/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶15

The prosecution case, in short, is that 40 liters country made liquor was recovered from bush.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. It is submitted that recovery is from an open place, which is accessible to one

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84423 of 2025(2) dt.04-12-2025 2/2

¶18

and all. The petitioner is in custody since 11.10.2025 and has got no criminal antecedent/s. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the BNSS, 2023.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, clean antecedent of the petitioner and the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Let the petitioner 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 Excise Danapur PS Case No. 675 of 2025.

¶22

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶23

Raj Kishore/- U T

Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu Ray v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu Ray 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

Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Chhotu Kumar Sav @ Chotu Kumar Sav Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Nagina Rajbanshi @ Nawina Rajbanshi @ Nagina Vs The State of Bihar

Karu Chaudhary @ Jogendra Kumar @ Jogendra Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Mazhar Alam Vs The State of Bihar