Patna High Court
Vishwajeet Kumar @ Vishwajeet PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Vishwajeet Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case involving the alleged seizure of 169.920 litres of English liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He contended that he had no possession of the liquor, that his name was linked to the case only through a chowkidar’s statement, and that the recovery was made from a co‑accused, not from him, highlighting a procedural lapse under Section 103 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act. The State opposed bail, relying on Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, arguing that pre‑arrest bail is not permissible. The court, referring to the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar (2019 PLJR 1089), held that anticipatory bail could be granted despite the statutory bar, subject to strict conditions. Accordingly, the court ordered anticipatory bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act where the petitioner is alleged to have no possession of the seized liquor.
- Whether Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act bars the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the alleged non‑compliance with Section 103 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- seizure of liquor
- procedural lapse
- Section 30
- Section 76
- Section 438
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20760 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-642 Year-2022 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Vishwajeet Kumar @ Vishwajeet Pandey S/o Balwant Pandey @ Balwant
Kumar Pandey R/o village - Araji Sahbajpur Ward No - 9, P.S - Kajipur ,
(Hajipur Sadar), District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Asha Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 Heard Mr. Hemant Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Ms. Asha Kumari, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 642 of 2022, F.I.R
dated 15.08.2022 registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 169.920 liters of English liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that is appears
from the FIR that nothing has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20760 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/4
been made from the co-accused, namely, Bhola Pandey @
Dhananjay Pandey. He further submits that name of the
petitioner has been transpired on the basis of the disclosure
made by the local chowkidar and except the aforesaid, no other
material has come during investigation which suggest the
involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. There is
non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for
recovery under Section 103 of the BNSS. No case, whatsoever,
would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the
pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable.
6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full
Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar
reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid
down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on
behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant
of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of
counsel for the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20760 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/4
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in
the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within
a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 1 - cum-
Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in
connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 642 of 2022,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following
conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20760 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
4/4
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…