Dinesh Ray Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Mili Kumar, Advocate Mrs. Shambhawi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KUMAR MANISH ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 22-07-2026

¶12

Heard Mrs. Mili Kumar, learned counsel appearing

¶13

on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, learned APP for the State.

¶14

The present application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Chapra Mufassil (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 771 of 2022, for the offence punishable under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, there is a recovery of 80 litres of illicit country made liquor left in plastic bags kept near a field near a math. Petitioner has not been arrested on the spot.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48746 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 2/3

¶18

the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case entirely on the basis of suspicion.

¶19

No incriminating article has been recovered from the consious possession of the petitioner and the alleged recovery is made from an open place. She next submitted that both the seizure list witnesses are members of the raiding party.

¶20

It is further submitted that the seizure list witnesses are police personnel and not independent witness so there is non-compliance of Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS. The petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2026.

¶21

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1^st Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Saran at Chapra/concerned court in connection with Chapra Mufassil (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 771 of 2022, subject to following conditions:-

¶23

(i) One of the bailors should be family member of the petitioner.

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48746 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 3/3

¶25

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in the trial and will remain present on all dates personally or should be duly represented through his counsel and whenever required to be physically present by the court, he should physically appear in the Court on that date.

¶26

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶27

(Kumar Manish, J)

¶28

Ranjeet/-

¶29

U T

Dinesh Ray v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh 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

Binod Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Chhotan Shukla @ Ghotan Shukla @ Nilesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Prahlad Saw Vs The State of Bihar