Patna High Court
Nitesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as the FIR does not establish a prima facie offence and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitesh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 23.4 litres of foreign liquor seized from a scooter he owned but had handed over to a villager. The prosecution argued that as the owner, he could not escape liability. The petitioner relied on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which permits anticipatory bail in Excise matters despite the bar in Section 76(2) if the FIR does not establish an offence. The court, noting the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent and the cited precedent, granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions, reserving the right to cancel the bail if any falsehood or criminal conduct is discovered. The order directs the petitioner to furnish a bail bond and comply with 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).
- Whether the petitioner, as the owner of the vehicle, can be exonerated from liability in the absence of a criminal antecedent.
- Whether the FIR allegations constitute an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 76(2)
- criminal antecedent
- seizure of liquor
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20795 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-355 Year-2025 Thana- EKMA District- Saran
======================================================
Nitesh Kumar Son of Rameshwar Upadhyay Resident of Village - Ramgharha
Tola Mardanpur, P.S.- Duraondha, District - Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Piyush Parasar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard Mr. Piyush Parasar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 355 of 2025 for the offence
under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
lodged on 26.10.2025 by the informant, Md. Javed Alam.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police on secret
information, intercepted Apache motorcycle as also scooty and
there is/are recovery/seizure of 6.120 liters and 17.280 liters of
foreign liquor respectively (totalling 23.400). This led to the
FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
owns the scooty which was handed over to a villager, got
implicated and the last submission is that he do not have any
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20795 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
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
being the owner, he cannot exonerate himself from the alleged
occurrence.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that he do not have any criminal antecedent, in that
background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of
anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. If, however, it is found that contrary to the
statement made in paragraph-3, the petitioner has criminal
antecedent, the present order shall become infructuous.
9. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20795 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/4
arrest or surrender 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 like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Session Judge cum Exclusive
Special Court Excise Act-I, Saran at Chapra/concerned Court in
connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 355 of 2025 subject to the
following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document 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 six months to mark his
attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be
taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20795 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
4/4
(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
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…