Patna High Court
Ramjeet Yadav @ Ramjit 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 and the bar under Section 76(2) does not preclude such relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramjeet Yadav, was implicated in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly transporting 531 litres of illicit liquor. He contended that he was merely the owner of the vehicle and had no knowledge of the contraband, and he had no prior criminal record. Relying on a Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, he sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., arguing that the bar under Section 76(2) of the Excise Act should not apply where no offence is made out. The court accepted the submission, noting the absence of possession and antecedents, and granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs 10,000 payment to the District Legal Services Authority and a series of attendance and conduct conditions. The order directed the petitioner to appear before the police and trial court as stipulated, with bail bond and sureties to be furnished.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act despite the bar in Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of knowledge and non‑possession of the liquor justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether imposing a payment to the District Legal Services Authority as a condition of bail is permissible.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- prohibition act
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 76(2) bar
- bail conditions
- legal services authority
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25496 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2025 Thana- DURAULI District- Siwan
======================================================
Ramjeet Yadav @ Ramjit Yadav Son of Tuntun Yadav Resident of Village-
Mahpur Khajarauni, P.S. - Hussainganj, District - Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bijay Prakash Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Darauli P.S. Case No. 298 of 2025 instituted under Section
30(a), 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment)
Act 2022 lodged on 02.11.2025 by the informant, Avinash
Kumar Jha.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that a Pick-Up-Van was intercepted and there is recovery of 531
liters of country made liquor. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
being the bona-fide owner, and handed over it to the driver little
knowledge that the liquor is being carried on it. He has no
criminal antecedent. Last submission is that irrespective of the
outcome of the present case and/or accepting the allegation, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25496 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/4
petitioner intends to contribute Rs.10,000/- to the District Legal
Services Authority, Siwan for installing music system in the
Civil Court, Siwan through Demand Draft issued by the local
branch of the State Bank of India.
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
is the owner of the vehicle.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25496 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/4
also that nothing has been recovered from his conscious
possession nor he has criminal antecedent, in that background,
this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory
bail subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- to the District Legal
Services Authority, Siwan for installing music system in the
Civil Court, Siwan through Demand Draft issued by the local
branch of the State Bank of India.
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 Darauli P.S. Case No.
298 of 2025 to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special
Excise Court No.1, Siwan 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;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25496 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
4/4
(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,
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…