Patna High Court
Tapasi DhangarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted where the FIR does not establish an offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and no material has been recovered from the petitioners' conscious possession, notwithstanding the bar under Section 76(2).
Summary
The petitioners, Tapasi Dhangar and Suraj Dhangar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under sections 30(a) and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after police recovered 60 litres of illicit liquor near their residence. The prosecution alleged the liquor belonged to the petitioners, while the defence argued that no liquor was found in their conscious possession and that their prior criminal record should not alone justify denial of bail. Relying on the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, the court examined whether the bar under Section 76(2) of the Act precludes anticipatory bail when the FIR does not establish a prima facie offence. The court concluded that anticipatory bail could be granted as the FIR did not substantiate an offence against the petitioners and no material was recovered from them. Accordingly, the court ordered anticipatory bail with a set of strict conditions, including bond, sureties, regular appearances before police and courts, and prohibition on tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar in Section 76(2).
- Whether the FIR and police recovery establish a prima facie offence against the petitioners.
- Whether the petitioners' lack of conscious possession justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- section 30
- section 41
- section 76(2)
- conscious possession
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25458 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2026 Thana- PALANWA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Tapasi Dhangar S/o- Jai Karan Dhangar R/v- Palanwa, Dhangar Toli Ps-
Palanwa Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 25464 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2026 Thana- PALANWA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Suraj Dhangar @ Suraj Kumar Son of Munilal Dhanga R/O Vill.- Palanwa,
Dhangar Toli, P.S.- Palanwa, Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 25458 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prateek Tandon, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 25464 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prateek Tandon, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Palanwa P.S. Case No. 19/2026 for the offence
under sections 30(a) and 41 (i) of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act lodged on 22.01.2026 by the informant, Bheem
Singh.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25458 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/4
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police raided the
place and found 60 liters of country made liquor near the bushes
behind the pond which is closer to the petitioners’ house. This
led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that only
because they have criminal antecedent got implicated and
nothing has been recovered from their conscious possession.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioners 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 as
per the Police information, the recovery belongs to the
petitioners.
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 their conscious
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25458 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/4
possession and they shall be diligently appearing in trial, in that
background, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege
of anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. Let the petitioners 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) each with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 2,
East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Palanwa P.S. Case
No. 19/2026 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioners 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 the bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioners shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight for six months to mark their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25458 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
4/4
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 petitioners 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 petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…