Dismissed¶8

Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Jul 2026CR. MISC./43234/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail refused — Patna High Court, Sandeep Kumar, J, 13-07-2026 — Cr. Misc. Nos. 42357 & 43234 of 2026 (common order) — Benipatti Excise P.S. Case No. 111 of 2026, Section 30(a), Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — 900 litres illicit liquor recovered from vehicle; petitioners apprehended at spot; custody since 11.05.2026; three criminal antecedents noted against Ajay Mukhiya (per APP); observations prima facie and limited to bail adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail refused: having considered the submissions of the parties, the materials on record, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the recovery of 900 litres of illicit liquor and the fact that the petitioners were allegedly apprehended from the place of occurrence, the Court was not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioners. ¶7

Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Mahto Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioners (Ajay Mukhiya and Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Mahto) in connection with Benipatti Excise P.S. Case No. 111 of 2026, registered for the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, in view of the alleged recovery of 900 litres of illicit liquor and their alleged apprehension at the place of occurrence.

¶3

Court's answer

¶7

Key takeaways

Rider/caveat: every observation in the order is prima facie and limited solely to adjudication of the present bail applications; such observations shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings.obiter¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Sandeep Kumar, J), by common oral order dated 13-07-2026, dismissed two regular bail applications (Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 42357 and 43234 of 2026), heard together as arising out of the same FIR, i.e., Benipatti Excise P.S. Case No. 111 of 2026, registered for the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Per the prosecution case, 900 litres of illicit liquor were recovered from the vehicle during search and seizure and both petitioners (Ajay Mukhiya; Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Mahto) were allegedly apprehended at the place of occurrence. Learned APP opposed bail, submitting that Ajay Mukhiya has three criminal antecedents. Weighing the nature and gravity of the allegations, the quantity recovered and the alleged apprehension from the spot, the Court declined regular bail. All observations were expressly declared prima facie and confined to the bail stage, without expression on the merits.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42357 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2026 Thana- Excise Benipatti District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Ajay Mukhiya son of Ramsufal Mukhiya R/o Village- Benta Parsa, Ward No 09, Police Station -Harlakhi, District -Madhubani

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

with

¶11

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 43234 of 2026

¶12

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2026 Thana- Excise Benipatti District- Madhubani

¶13

====================================================== Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Mahto son of Vindeshwar Singh R/o Village- Phulhar, ward no 03, Police Station -Harlakhi, District -Madhubani

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶18

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 42357 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md Soban Asghar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd.(App) (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 43234 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md Soban Asghar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

4 13-07-2026

¶21

These cases arise out of the same P.S. Case i.e.,

¶22

Benipatti Excise P.S. Case No. 111 of 2026; therefore, they are

¶23

being heard together and disposed of by a common order.

¶24

2 . Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶25

learned APP for the State.

¶26

3 . The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42357 of 2026(4) dt.13-07-2026 2/3

¶28

Benipatti Excise P.S. Case No. 111 of 2026 registered for the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶29

4 . As per the prosecution case, during the course of search and seizure, 900 litres of illicit liquor were recovered from the vehicle in question. The petitioners were allegedly apprehended at the place of occurrence.

¶30

5 . Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that they have not committed any offence and are in custody since 11.05.2026.

¶31

6 . Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that one of the petitioners, namely Ajay Mukhiya, has three criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that a huge quantity of illicit liquor was recovered from the vehicle and both the petitioners were apprehended from the spot itself.

¶32

7 . Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, the materials available on record, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the recovery of 900 litres of illicit liquor and the fact that the petitioners were allegedly apprehended from the place of occurrence, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioners.

¶33

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42357 of 2026(4) dt.13-07-2026 3/3

¶34

8 . Accordingly, these applications for regular bail

¶35

stand dismissed.

¶36

9 . It is made clear that any observation made herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail applications. Such observations shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any

¶37

manner.

¶38

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶39

Shishir/-

¶40

U T

Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Mahto 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

Ajhola Devi @ Ajholiya Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Kishori Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Nath Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Alok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Zahirul Haque @ Zahirul Hoque Vs The State of Bihar