Patna High Court - Orders
Vicky Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 9 October, 2025
Author: Sunil Dutta Mishra
Bench: Sunil Dutta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52463 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-482 Year-2025 Thana- FATUA District- Patna
======================================================
Vicky Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar S/O Brij Raj Prasad Yadav @ Brijraj Prasad
Yadav R/O Village- Shishamill Patel Nagar, P.S- Fatuha, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Asha Devi, APP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 09-10-2025Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered under Sections 30(a), 56(c) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per prosecution case, on the basis of secret information, 3173.975 litre illicit liquor was recovered from the godown. Two co-accused persons were apprehended on the spot. Co-accused Ahtasham Uddin, who is owner of the said godown disclosed that he gave the same on rent to the petitioner and co- accused Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Saw at Rs.30,000/- per month.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner is neither tenant of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52463 of 2025(5) dt.09-10-2025 2/3 godown in question nor he has taken the same on rent from co- accused Ahtasham Uddin. Learned counsel submits that due to business rivalry, co-accused Ahtasham Uddin (owner of the godown) falsely implicated the petitioner in the present case. He further submits that petitioner was not present on the spot on the alleged date of occurrence and he has no concern either with the alleged seized liquor or with the seized vehicles. Learned counsel submits that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is in custody since 02.07.2025, having four criminal antecedents of similar nature, in which he is on bail and chargesheet had already been submitted in this case after completion of investigation. He further submits that there is no likelihood of absconding the petitioner or tampering with the evidence and he undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52463 of 2025(5) dt.09-10-2025 3/3 satisfaction of learned Court concerned in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No.482 of 2025 with following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the learned Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bonds by the learned Trial Court;
(ii) The petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iii) The petitioner shall desist from committing any such criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) Ritik/-
U T