Patna High Court
Ajay Prasad @ Ajay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted where the FIR does not disclose an offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, notwithstanding the bar in Section 76(2), especially when the petitioner has no antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Prasad, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018, alleging his involvement in the seizure of 23.4 litres of foreign liquor. He contended that the two‑wheeler involved had been sold to another person and that he had no criminal antecedent. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar (2019 (2) PLJR 1089), he argued that anticipatory bail could be granted despite the bar under Section 76(2) of the same Act if the FIR does not disclose an offence. The State opposed the relief. The Court, noting the petitioner’s clean record and the cited precedent, granted anticipatory bail subject to stringent conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the Act. The order directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond and comply with attendance and conduct requirements for the next six months.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case arising under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act despite the bar in Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent and the alleged sale of the vehicle justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- prohibition law
- excise law
- Section 30
- Section 76
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25493 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2023 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Ajay Prasad @ Ajay Kumar Son of Ravindra Yadav @ Ravindra Prasad
Yadav Resident of Village- Jaganpura, P.S.- Ram Krishna Nagar, District-
Patna (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : None.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though
learned counsel for the State is present.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 168 of 2023 instituted under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment
Act, 2018 lodged on 20.04.2023 by the informant, Manish
Kumar.
3. As per the FIR, the informant alleged that on secret
information, during patrolling on Ara-Buxar Four Lane, a two
wheeler was intercepted and there is recovery/seizure of 23.400
liters of foreign liquor. This led to the Fir.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
earlier the vehicle was sold to one Suraj Kumar but registration
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25493 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/4
was not transferred which led to his implication. He do not have
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.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is
ready to put in his attendance for every day for next one month
before the concerned police station and if it is found that he is
indulged in any criminal activity in future, the State can take
steps for cancellation of present bail bond, if he is granted relief.
8. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also he do not have criminal antecedent, in that background,
this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory
bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25493 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/4
9. 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 Ara Muffasil P.S. Case
No. 168 of 2023 to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special
Excise Judge-I, Bhojpur, Ara 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25493 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
4/4
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,
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…