Patna High Court
Laxhman KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate as the FIR does not establish a cognizable offence against the petitioner and he has no criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Laxhman Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 alleging his involvement in the seizure of 9 litres of foreign liquor from a motorcycle. He contended that he neither owned the motorcycle nor had any possession of the liquor and had no prior criminal record. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, he argued that anticipatory bail could be granted despite the statutory bar in Section 76(2) if the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. The State opposed, citing the informant’s identification of the petitioner. The Court, after considering the submissions and the precedent, held that no offence was made out against the petitioner and granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., imposing several conditions for his release.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act despite the bar under Section 76(2).
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute an offence under Section 30(a) against the petitioner.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession, ownership, and criminal antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 76(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- criminal antecedent
- seizure of foreign liquor
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15254 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1073 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Nawada
======================================================
Laxhman Kumar S/o- Sohar Yadav Resident of Village- Dhamni,P.S. Rajouli,
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.Ramesh Chandra, 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. 1073 of 2025 instituted
under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2016 lodged on 19.12.2025 by the informant,
Nuetan.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the motorcycle was intercepted and there is
recovery/seizure of 9 liters of foreign liquor. Ramawatar Ram
was arrested who gave the name of this petitioner. This led to
the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
neither anything has been recovered from his conscious
possession nor he owns the motorcycle. Further, he do not have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15254 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/4
criminal 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 opposes the prayer submitting that
the arrested person has name him.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra)
coupled with he fact that he do not have criminal antecedent, 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.15254 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/4
Case No. 1073 of 2025 to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive
Special Excise Court-II, 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.15254 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.