Patna High Court
Awadhesh Kumar Yadav @ Avdesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as no offence is made out against the petitioner under the FIR.
Summary
Awadhesh Kumar Yadav sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022, alleging that 20 litres of illicit liquor were seized from a motorcycle. The petitioner contended that he neither owned the motorcycle nor had any possession of the liquor, and he had no prior criminal record. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, the petitioner argued that anticipatory bail could be granted despite the bar under Section 76(2) if no offence is established. The State opposed, citing villagers' identification of the petitioner. The court, noting the lack of ownership, absence of antecedent, and the cited precedent, granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. with detailed conditions for appearance and conduct.
Issues considered
- Can anticipatory bail be granted under Section 438 CrPC in a case arising under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act despite the bar in Section 76(2)?
- Is the petitioner likely to be implicated in the alleged offence given he does not own the vehicle or possess the seized liquor?
- Are the conditions imposed for the grant of anticipatory bail appropriate and sufficient?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act
- section 30
- section 438
- section 76(2)
- seizure of liquor
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21639 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
District- Jamui
======================================================
Awadhesh Kumar Yadav @ Avdesh Yadav Son of Late Sudin Yadav Resident
of Village- Tilakpur, P.S.- Khaira, District- Jamui, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Ankita Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Ms.Ankita Kumari, learned counsel for the
petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Khaira G.O. Comp. P.S Case no. 129 C2 of 2020
registered under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Amendment Act, 2022 lodged on 15.06.2020 by the
informant, Shiv Nandan Singh.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that during interception of the motorcycle, 20 liters of country
made liquor recovered/seized. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession nor
the motorcycle belongs to him. Further, he do not have criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21639 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/4
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
his name has been given by some of the villagers.
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 nor he
owns the motorcycle, 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 Khaira G.O. Comp. P.S
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21639 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/4
Case no. 129 C2 of 2020 to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive
Excise Court-II, Jamui 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 day for one month and later 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.21639 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
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…