Patna High Court
Ravi Kumar GuptaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted as the FIR did not establish a cognizable offence against the petitioner and the bar under Section 76(2) was not applicable.
Summary
Ravi Kumar Gupta, proprietor of a general store in Gopalganj, was implicated in a case (PS No. 956 of 2025) for alleged contravention of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after liquor was seized from his premises. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that he did not have actual possession of the seized liquor and that the store was managed by his employee, Rishi Kumar. The State opposed, contending that the petitioner owned the store and invoking the bar under Section 76(2) of the Act. The Court, relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar (2019 (2) PLJR 1089), held that anticipatory bail can be granted where the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence against the accused despite the statutory bar. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a set of stringent conditions, including bond, sureties, regular appearances, and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar in Section 76(2) when no possession is established.
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the store makes him liable for the alleged offence.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- possession
- Section 76(2) bar
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21932 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-956 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District-
Gopalganj
======================================================
Ravi Kumar Gupta S/O Late Parma Nand Sah @ Parma Nand Sah Resident
Of Village - V M Field, P.s- Town, Dist Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned
counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 956 of 2025 for
the offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant on
secret information, raided the general store of the petitioner and
there is recovery/seizure of 23.46 litre country made as also
foreign liquor. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
though he is proprietor of the general store, it is run by his staff,
Rishi Kumar who was apprehended at the spot. Though the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21932 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/4
petitioner concede that he has 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 he
owns the store.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that nothing has been recovered from his conscious
possession, 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 District and Addl. Sessions Judge XIII-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21932 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/4
cum-Spl. Excise Court No. I, Gopalganj in connection with
Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 956 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(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;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21932 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
4/4
(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.