Allowed

Aman Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Jul 2026CR. MISC./42212/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought in an excise case after alleged recovery of 200 litres of illicit country-made liquor from the petitioner's bag on a train. Noting no independent witness to the seizure, custody since May 2026, and one prior case, bail was allowed with two sureties and attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on regular bail on Rs. 10,000 bonds with two like sureties, subject to attendance at every trial date.

Aman Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42212 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2026 Thana- GAYA RAIL P.S. District- Gaya

¶3

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

¶4

Aman Kumar, aged about 19 years, Male, Son of Ashok Yadav, Resident of Mohalla- Bangala Asthan, Ward No. 9, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Gaya Ji.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Chandni Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1, APP ======================================================

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER

¶8

2 01-07-2026

¶9

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

¶10

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gaya GRPS Case (Rail Gaya P.S. Case No. 132 of 2026) instituted for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022.

¶11

As per allegation in the FIR, on search, 200 liters of illicit country-made liquor has been recovered from the bag of the petitioner.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the said liquor has been recovered from the coach of a train and not from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has been made scapegoat in the present case

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42212 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026 2/3

¶14

only on the basis of suspicion. He next submits that as per the FIR and seizure list, it appears that there is contradiction in the place of recovery as the recovery has been shown in the seizure in the general coach of the train but in the fardbeyan it is stated that the petitioner were apprehended and the recovery was made from a bag. Petitioner has got one criminal antecedent which has been shown in the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, which has been annexed in the bail petition. Petitioner is in custody since 11.05.2026.

¶15

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

¶16

From perusal of the FIR, seizure list and the impugned order of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No.2, Gaya Ji dated 25.05.2026, it appears that petitioner is named in the FIR. From perusal of the records, it also appears that on the basis of written report of the informant, FIR has been registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022 against the present petitioner and the allegation is of recovery of 200 liters of illicit countrymade liquor from the bag of the petitioner. From perusal of seizure list, it also appears that there is no any independent witness of the seizure, petitioner is under custody since

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42212 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026 3/3

¶18

11.05.2026, so considering all these aspects of the case and submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Accordingly the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner above named be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 2, Gaya Ji in connection with Rail Gaya P.S. Case No. 132 of 2026, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall remain physically present on each and every date fixed by the trial Court till conclusion of the trial.

¶20

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

¶21

Anand Kr.

Aman Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganesh Shanker Rao Vs The Bettiah Estate under the Court of Wards through its Manager

Vishal Kumar @ Fudan Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Kumar @ Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bhola Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Saltu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar