Patna High Court
Aman KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted as the petitioner had no criminal antecedent, no conscious possession of the liquor, and the FIR did not establish an offence under the Act, notwithstanding the bar under Section 76(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Aman Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 25.2 litres of foreign liquor seized during a police raid. He argued that he had no criminal antecedent and that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, merely that others named him. The State opposed, citing the naming of the petitioner by arrested individuals. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which allows anticipatory bail despite the bar in Section 76(2) if no offence is established, the Court granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions. The order directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and comply with attendance and non‑interference requirements. The bail would be effective if the petitioner is arrested or surrenders within four weeks of the order.
Issues considered
- Can anticipatory bail be granted under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar in Section 76(2) when the FIR does not establish an offence?
- Does the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent and absence of conscious possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail?
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 76(2)
- foreign liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27798 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2026 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
Aman Kumar S/o- Dineshwar Ray Resident of Nikata Diyara Digha Ghat,
Danapur cum Khagaul Ps- Digha Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radhe Shyam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Digha P.S. Case No. 94 of 2026 for the offence
under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
lodged on 02.02.2026 by the informant, Dilip Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police on secret
information raided the place and from the sack which was being
loaded, there is recovery/seizure of 25.2 liter foreign liquor, the
apprehended person gave the name of the person who escaped.
This led to the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
has no criminal antecedent and admittedly, nothing has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27798 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/4
recovered from his conscious possession, only because those
apprehended named him, the implication.
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
persons arrested have 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 the petitioner do not have criminal antecedent and
nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession, in
that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the
privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. 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/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27798 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/4
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise-II, Patna in
connection with Digha P.S. Case No. 94 of 2026 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27798 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
4/4
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)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.