Shyam Ram Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 19-01-2026

¶12

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

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pupri Prohibition P.S. Case No. 568 of 2025 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶14

The prosecution case, in short, is that total 180 litres of liquor was recovered from motorcycle.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1604 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026 2/3

¶17

that petitioner is in no manner connected with the vehicle in question or the alleged recovery of liquor. The petitioner is in custody since 07.11.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Pupri Prohibition P.S. Case No. 568 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:

¶21

(I) One of the bailors shall be the deponent of the present bail application, namely, Jitendra Ram.

¶22

(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.

¶23

(III) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1604 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026 3/3

¶25

witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

¶26

for cancellation of bail.

¶27

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶28

Alok Verma/-