Patna High Court
AFTAB ALAM @ MD. AFTAB ALAMversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted because the FIR did not disclose a cognizable offence and the petitioner had no prior criminal record, notwithstanding the bar under Section 76(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Aftab Alam, sought anticipatory bail in connection with an excise case (PS No. 436 of 2025) alleging offences under sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The FIR stemmed from the seizure of 110 litres of country‑made liquor from a motorcycle later sold by the petitioner to Dhananjay Kumar. The petitioner argued he had no criminal antecedent and that the allegations did not constitute an offence under the Act. Relying on the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, the court held that anticipatory bail can be granted despite the bar in Section 76(2) if the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. The court, noting the petitioner’s clean record, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and several conditions regarding appearance before police and courts, non‑tampering with evidence, and refraining from further offences.
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 allegations in the FIR disclose a cognizable offence under sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(3), 76(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- excise law
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- Section 76(2) bar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21282 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-436 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE SHERGHATI District- Gaya
======================================================
AFTAB ALAM @ MD. AFTAB ALAM S/O MD ISMAIL R/O Vill.- Shayam
Nagar Nima, P.s- Amas, Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar PATNA
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sucheta Yadav, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 19-05-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Excise Sherghati P.S. Case No. 436 of 2025 for
the offence under sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act.
3. As per the FIR, the Police intercepted the motorcycle.
One Dhananjay Kumar was apprehended and there is
recovery/seizure of 110 liter country made liquor. This led to the
FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
though he owned the motorcycle earlier, it was sold to Dhananjay
Kumar who was driving the motorcycle. The last submission is
that he do not have criminal antecedent.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21282 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
2/3
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, Mrs. Sucheta Yadav opposes the prayer
for bail.
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, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of
anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
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 Exclusive Special Excise Judge No. 3, Gaya in
connection with Excise Sherghati P.S. Case No. 436 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21282 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
3/3
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for co-operating 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;
(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)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.