Patna High Court
Golu Kumar @ Golu Kumar RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Golu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case involving the alleged recovery of 2,205 litres of illicit liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He contended that the recovery was made from a truck, not from his possession, and that his name was implicated only through the disclosure of a co‑accused, rendering the FIR false and procedurally defective under Sections 103 and 105 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The prosecution opposed bail, invoking Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and citing the petitioner’s three prior criminal cases. The court, relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar (2019) and noting that similarly situated co‑accused had been granted anticipatory bail, decided to grant bail subject to strict conditions. The order directed the petitioner to surrender within thirty days, furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and comply with conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, including cooperation with the trial and no tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite Section 76(2) and his prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether procedural lapses in the recovery under Sections 103 and 105 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita justify granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 103, 105, 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illicit liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- procedural lapse
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27003 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2023 Thana- MANIYARI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Golu Kumar @ Golu Kumar Ray S/O Paanchu Ray Resident of Village-
Mahua Singh Ray, Ward No.- 01, P.S- Mahua, Distt.- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 Heard Mr. Anish Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Maniyari P.S. Case No. 03 of 2023, F.I.R dated
04.01.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Section
30(a), 32(2)(3), 41(1)(2) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 2205.00 liters of illicit liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent 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 rather the recovery has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27003 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/4
been made from the truck in question and the petitioner was not
apprehended at the place of occurrence and his name transpired
on the basis of disclosure made apprehended co-accused person
There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed
for recovery under Section 103 and 105 of Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita. He next submits that similarly situated co-
accused persons, namely, Khatija Begam and Aman Kumar Jha
have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by different
co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide order dated 24.01.2024
and 28.02.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 79496 of 2023 and Cr. Misc.
No. 2107 of 2025. 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 and apart from that the
petitioner carries three criminal antecedents other than the
present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the
bail application that the petitioner is on bail in the pending
matters.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27003 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/4
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
of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of
counsel for the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, name of the
petitioner has been transpired on the basis of disclosure made
apprehended co-accused person and similarly situated co-
accused persons have been granted the privilege of anticipatory
bail by different co-ordinate Benches of this Court, 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 Exclusive
Special Excise Court No.II, Muzaffarpur in connection with
Maniyari P.S. Case No. 03 of 2023, 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:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27003 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
4/4
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.
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…