Patna High Court
Ritesh Kumar @ Ritesh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the recovery of illicit liquor from the petitioner’s house established sufficient grounds to refuse the bail privilege.
Summary
The petitioner, Ritesh Kumar Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged possession of 14.25 litres of illicit liquor recovered from his house. The petitioner argued that no incriminating material was found in his conscious possession, he had a clean antecedent, and the accusation was based merely on suspicion. The State contended that the recovery of liquor from the petitioner’s premises justified denial of anticipatory bail and relied on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar. The Court examined the relevance of the seized liquor and the precedent, concluding that the circumstances did not merit the privilege of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court rejected the petitioner’s anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when illicit liquor is recovered from the accused’s premises under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the mere suspicion and lack of conscious possession of the seized liquor preclude denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar is applicable to the present case.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illicit liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Full Bench precedent
- suspicion
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19643 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2026 Thana- Amhara P.S. (I.I.T.A. Bihta) District- Patna
======================================================
Ritesh Kumar @ Ritesh Kumar Yadav S/O Surendra Yadav Resident of
Village- Amhara, P.S.- IIT Amhara, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satish Chandra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in IIT Amhara P. S.
Case No. 14 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, 14.25 liters illicit
liquor was recovered from the house of petitioner.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that no incriminating material has been recovered from
the conscious possession of the petitioner and he is no way
connected with the aforesaid recovery. Petitioner has been made
accused only on suspicion. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State submits that 14.25 liters
illicit liquor was recovered from the house of the petitioner and
he is not entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail in view of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19643 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/2
Full Bench decision of this Court rendered in the case of Ram
Vinay Yadav vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2019(2)
P.L.J.R. 1089 (F.B.).
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, anticipatory bail
application of the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…