Patna High Court
Kamlesh Kumar @ Kamlesh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as no offence under the Act is made out against the petitioner and he has no criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged seizure of 55.8 litres of Nepali liquor. He contended that the seized liquor was not in his conscious possession and that the motorcycle involved was transferred to a relative, also highlighting his clean criminal record. The State opposed, asserting ownership of the motorcycle. Relying on the precedent of Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, the court examined whether anticipatory bail could be granted despite the statutory bar under Section 76(2). Considering the lack of direct possession and the petitioner’s clean antecedent, the court granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions, including bond, sureties, regular appearances before police and courts, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Can anticipatory bail be granted under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 despite the bar in Section 76(2)?
- Is the petitioner likely to be held liable for the alleged offence given the absence of conscious possession?
- Are the conditions imposed for anticipatory bail appropriate and sufficient to safeguard the investigation?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- seizure of liquor
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15185 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2025 Thana- NADI District- Supaul
======================================================
Kamlesh Kumar @ Kamlesh Kumar Yadav Son of Umesh Yadav Resident of
Village- Dudhaila, P.O.- Kukurdaura, P.S.- Andhramath, District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manish Kumar No 13, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Abhimanyu Sharma, 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 Supaul Nadi P.S. Case No. 131 of 2025 instituted under
Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2022 lodged on 17.10.2025 by the
informant,Lalan Kumar Muni.
3. As per the prosecution story, the police intercepted
a motorcycle and there is recovery/seizure of 55.8 liters of
Nepali liquor. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession, the
motorcycle which he owns was given to his relative and this
way got implicated. Further, he do not have criminal antecedent.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15185 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/4
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 opposes the prayer stating that the
motorcycle belong to him.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that the petitioner do not have criminal antecedent, in that
background, 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 Supaul Nadi P.S. Case
No. 131 of 2025 to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special
Excise Court-I, Supaul subject to the conditions as laid down
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15185 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/4
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,
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15185 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
4/4
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.