Patna High Court
Niranjan Kumar @ Niranjan RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail must be granted as the petitioner’s antecedents are clean, no liquor was recovered from his possession, and the investigation failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 76(2).
Summary
The petitioner Niranjan Kumar was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 50 litres of country‑made liquor. The recovery was made from two motorcycles, and the petitioner’s name was recorded only on the basis of a statement by a local chowkidar; no liquor was found in his conscious possession. The petitioner, who has a clean antecedent, sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the investigation violated mandatory procedures under Section 100 of the CrPC and Section 103 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The State opposed bail, relying on Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Referring to the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, the court held that the lack of material evidence and procedural lapses justified granting anticipatory bail, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC/Section 482(2) BNSS. Accordingly, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, imposing standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the alleged contravention is based solely on a third‑party disclosure and no material is recovered from the accused
- Whether Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act bars the grant of anticipatory bail
- Whether non‑compliance with the procedural requirements of Section 100 CrPC/Section 103 BNSS vitiates the prosecution’s case
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 103, 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 76(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 100, 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 76(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- Section 438(2)
- Section 100
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 103
- Section 482(2)
- procedural lapse
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24291 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2024 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran
======================================================
Niranjan Kumar @ Niranjan Rai Sadhu Rai R/O Vill.- Balua, P.S-
Doriganj,Dist- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 Heard Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Doriganj P.S. Case No. 92 of 2024, F.I.R dated
11.04.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section
30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 50 liters of country made liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has clean antecedent and has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. He
further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that nothing has
been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24291 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/4
rather the recovery has been made from two motorcycles in
question and name of the petitioner has been transpired on the
basis of disclosure made by local chowkidar and he stated that
the petitioner escaped from the place of occurrence and except
the disclosure made by local chowkidar, no other cogent
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 100 of Cr.P.C / Section 103 of Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24291 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/4
of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of
counsel for the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been
recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and the
petitioner has clean antecedent and his transpired on the basis of
disclosure made by local chowkidar, 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 learned Additional Sessions
Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Exclusive Special Excise Court
No.03, Saran at Chapra in connection with Doriganj P.S. Case
No. 92 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section
482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24291 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
4/4
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
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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.