Patna High Court
Vicky KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate as no offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act is made out against the petitioner.
Summary
Vicky Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging his involvement in the seizure of 9 litres of beer from a husk house. The prosecution’s case was based on an informant’s statement that the seized liquor was linked to the petitioner through his son. The petitioner contended that the seizure was from the husk house and not from his personal possession, and therefore no offence was made out against him. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which permits anticipatory bail despite the bar in Section 76(2) when no offence is established, the court was inclined to grant bail. The court ordered anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., including a bail bond, sureties, and compliance with various attendance and conduct requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2) of the Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged connection to the seized liquor, without any recovery from his personal possession, justifies granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 76(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 76
- Section 438
- excise seizure
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15177 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-760 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Nawada
======================================================
Vicky Kumar S/o- Sunil Singh Resident of Village- Badka Khaira, P.S.-
Akabarpur, District- Nawada,
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Man Mohan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Nawada Excise P.S. Case No. 760 of 2025 instituted
under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act,
2016 lodged on 30.09.2025 by the informant, Rajesh Kumar
Patel.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleges
that on secret information, reached the village and apprehended
one person. From the husk house, there is recovery/seizure of 9
liters beer. The apprehended person gave the name of his son,
this petitioner. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
admittedly, the recovery is from the husk house and not from the
personal possession of the petitioner, he do not have criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15177 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/4
antecedent.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon’ble Patna High Court in
the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in
2019 (2) PLJR 1089 wherein it has been held that an
application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar
Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar
under Section 76(2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation
made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made
out.
6. Learned APP, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh opposes
the prayer submitting that his father has named him.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that nothing has been recovered from his conscious
possession, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend
him the privilege of anticipatory bail.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail, in the event
of his arrest or surrender before the concerned court within a
period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each in connection with Nawada Excise P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15177 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/4
Case No. 760 of 2025 to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive
Special Court, Excise-2, Nawada subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also the other
conditions.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Driving License/Voter ID/Pan Card
etc.) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the police
station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight for next six months to mark his
attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be submitted
before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15177 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
4/4
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.