Patna High Court
Meghan Kumar @ Meghan SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted where the FIR does not disclose a prima facie offence, notwithstanding the bar in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Summary
Meghan Kumar was implicated in an Excise case for alleged seizure of 749.460 litres of foreign liquor, based on the testimony of an arrested accomplice who named him as the person who handed over a pickup van. The petitioner argued he had no criminal antecedent, did not own or drive the vehicle, and sought anticipatory bail. The State opposed, citing the accusation. The court, relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, held that anticipatory bail can be granted despite the bar under Section 76(2) when the FIR does not establish a prima facie offence. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail with several conditions, including a Rs.15,000 contribution to the District Legal Services Authority and a standard bail bond.
Issues considered
- Whether an application for anticipatory bail is maintainable under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar in Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioner can be said to have committed an offence under Section 30(a) based on the FIR allegations.
- Whether imposing a monetary contribution to the District Legal Services Authority as a condition of bail is permissible.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 76
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25789 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Katihar
======================================================
Meghan Kumar @ Meghan Singh S/o Bhagwat Prasad Singh @ Bhagwat
Singh R/o - Udama Rekha, PS- Muffasil, District - Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 322 of 2025 for the offence
under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act lodged
on 13.09.2025 by the informant, Ravi Kishore Prasad.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on secret information, the pick up van was intercepted and
there is recovery/seizure of 749.460 liters of foreign liquor. One
Raj Kumar was apprehended who gave the name of this petitioner
as the person who handed over the pick up van to him near the
over-bridge. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
neither he has criminal antecedent nor he owns the vehicle or at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25789 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/4
any point of time, was driver of the aforesaid pick up van, only
because Raj Kumar has been apprehended and gave his name,
implicated. The last submission is that without accepting the
allegation and/or the outcome of the present case, the petitioner
intends to contribute Rs. 15,000/- to the District Legal Services
Authority, Katihar for beautification/putting up flower pots in the
Civil Court Campus of Katihar Judgeship 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 the
apprehended person has named him.
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 nor he owns the vehicle and has no criminal
antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25789 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/4
him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions subject to
payment of Rs. 15,000/-/- to the District Legal Services Authority,
Katihar for beautification/putting up flower pots in the Civil Court
Campus of Katihar Judgeship through Demand Draft issued by the
local branch of the State Bank of India and the receipt of the
expenditure shall be submitted to the trial Court by the DLSA,
Katihar.
8. If, however, it is found that contrary to the statement
made in paragraph-3, the petitioner has criminal antecedent, the
present order shall become infructuous.
9. 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 Court of Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Court No. 1,
Katihar in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 322 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25789 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
4/4
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;
(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.
10. A copy of the order be sent to the Principal District
and Sessions Judge, Katihar for his/her perusal and needful.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…