Patna High Court
Prakash Yadav @ Prakash KumarversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to specified conditions and payment.
Summary
The petitioners, Prakash Yadav and Ashish Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged seizure of 37.17 litres of foreign liquor from a house near Chhote Lal Chauhan's residence. They contended that the liquor was not in their possession and that they were implicated solely due to prior criminal antecedents. Relying on the Patna High Court Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, they argued that anticipatory bail is permissible even when Section 76(2) of the Act bars it, provided no offence is made out. The State opposed the bail on the ground of the petitioners' criminal history. The Court, after considering the submissions and the precedent, granted anticipatory bail with a bail bond of Rs 10,000 each, two sureties, and several conditions including payment of Rs 5,000 each to the District Legal Services Authority for flower pots, regular appearances before police and courts, and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioners' alleged involvement in the seizure of liquor justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the condition of payment to the District Legal Services Authority is valid.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 76(2)
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- seizure of liquor
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27806 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2026 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
1. Prakash Yadav @ Prakash Kumar S/O Llakhendra Ray @ Lakhendra Yadav
R/o- Ranipur Murchapar, P.S.- Mehandiganj, Distt- Patna
2. Ashish Kumar @ Bittu Kumar S/O Manoj Kumar R/O Noon ka chauraha
hajari, P.S.- Khajekala, Dist.- Patna, As per FIR, R/O Beldari tola, renter in
the house of Chhote lal chauhan, P.s.- Mehandiganj, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Jiban Pd. Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard Mr. Ram Jiban Pd. Singh, learned counsel
for the petitioners and learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 62 of 2026 for the
offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act lodged on 03.03.2026 by the informant, Vijay Kumar
Yadav.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on evening patrolling and after getting information, the
Police reached the house but the accused managed to escape, the
locals gave the name including these two petitioners. Further,
upon search, 37.17 liter foreign liquor recovered/seized. This led
to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27806 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/4
recovery/seizure is from near the house of Chhote Lal Chauhan
and they have nothing to do with it, only because of criminal
antecedent, got implicated. Last submission is that without
accepting the allegation or outcome of the petition the
petitioners intend to pay Rs.5,000/- each (totaling Rs.10,000/-)
by Demand Draft issued by the local branch of the State Bank of
India/any Nationalized Bank to the District Legal Services
Authority, Patna for the purchase of flower pots for the Patna
City, Civil Court Campus.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioners 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
they have criminal antecedent.
7. 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.27806 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/4
also that nothing has been recovered from his conscious
possession, F.I.R. is there, they shall be facing the music, in that
background, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege
of anticipatory bail with conditions subject to payment of
Rs.5,000/- each (totaling Rs.10,000/-) by Demand Draft issued
by the local branch of the State Bank of India/any Nationalized
Bank to the District Legal Services Authority, Patna for the
purchase of flower pots for the Patna City, Civil Court Campus
to be submitted at the time of execution of bail bond.
8. Let the petitioners 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) each with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Court of Excise, Patna
City, Patna in connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 62 of
2026 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27806 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
4/4
(iii) the petitioners 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 petitioners 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 petitioners 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 petitioners 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.
9. Let a copy of the order be sent to the learned
Principal District and Sessions Judge, Patna for perusal and
needful.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…