Allowed¶18

Rinku v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC29 Jan 2026CR. MISC./5111/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court bail order dated 29-01-2026 by Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra in Cr. Misc. No.5111 of 2026 granting bail to Rinku under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, Muzaffarpur Excise P.S. Case No. 2060/2025; 354.960 litres foreign liquor recovered from pickup vehicle; driver-without-knowledge defence; custody since 13.12.2025; Section 103 BNSS 2023 compliance raised; bail on Rs. 15,000 bond with two like sureties and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted: petitioner to be released on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, after framing of charge if not already framed, subject to conditions that one bailor be a close family member and that the petitioner appear on every trial date (bail bonds cancellable by Trial Court on default on two consecutive dates).

Rinku Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arraigned in Muzaffarpur Excise P.S. Case No. 2060/2025 instituted under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Court's answer

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

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is to be released on bail, after framing of charge if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below, subject to conditions: (I) one bailor shall be a own/close member of the petitioner's family; (II) the petitioner shall appear on every trial date, failing which on default on two consecutive dates the Trial Court may cancel the bail bonds.

¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted - Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.5111 of 2026 (decided 29-01-2026, Rudra Prakash Mishra, J): petitioner Rinku, accused in Muzaffarpur Excise P.S. Case No. 2060/2025 under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act (prosecution case of recovery of 354.960 litres of foreign liquor from a pickup vehicle), granted bail. Defence: false implication, nothing recovered from conscious possession, petitioner merely the driver without knowledge of goods loaded, not owner of vehicle, no criminal antecedent, in custody since 13.12.2025, and alleged non-compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Court considered facts, circumstances and period of custody and allowed bail after framing of charge (if not already framed) on bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two like sureties, imposing conditions of a family-member bailor and attendance at every trial date with liberty to cancel bonds for default on two consecutive dates.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5111 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2060 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Rinku S/O Awdhesh Kumar @ Awadhesh Kumar R/O Vill.- Shyam Nagar, P.s.- Farukhabad, P.O.- Mopat Patti, Dist.- Farukhabad, U.P.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶7

ORAL ORDER

¶8

2 29-01-2026

¶9

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

¶10

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muzaffarpur Excise P.S. Case No. 2060/2025 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶11

The prosecution case, in short, is that total 354.960 litres of foreign liquor was recovered from pickup vehicle.

¶12

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 that petitioner is not the owner of the vehicle. It is further submitted that petitioner is the driver of the vehicle in question but he had no knowledge regarding the goods loaded in the vehicle. The petitioner is in custody since 13.12.2025 and has

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5111 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026 2/2

¶14

no criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶15

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

¶16

the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶17

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.

¶18

Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing of charge, if not already framed, 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 Muzaffarpur Excise P.S. Case No. 2060/2025, subject to the following conditions:.

¶19

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶22

atul/-

¶23

U T

Rinku v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinku 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

Krishna Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Ray @ Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Chitranjan Rai @ Chitranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vivek Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Prince Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sunny Kumar Vs The State of Bihar