Patna High Court
Dipu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with conditions, finding no sufficient basis to deny bail under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Dipu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 20 litres of country-made liquor seized from a vehicle he owned. He contended that the motorcycle was lent to a co‑villager and that no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and he has no criminal antecedent. The State opposed the bail. The Court, 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) when the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence, held that the petitioner’s claim was credible. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and several conditions regarding appearance, surety, and non‑interference with witnesses. The order directs release on bail if arrested or surrendered within four weeks.
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 allegations in the FIR constitute an offence under section 30(a) sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and clean record justify anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- section 30
- section 76(2)
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27834 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2025 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran
======================================================
Dipu Kumar S/o Jagdish Mahto @ Jagdish Singh R/o Village -
Parmanandpur, P.S - Sonepur, District - Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Suman Kumari 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 Dighwara P.S. Case No. 115 of 2025 for the
offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act lodged on 05.04.2025 by the informant, Manish Kumar Rai.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on secret information, the Police intercepted the vehicle and
recovered/seized 20 liter country made liquor. This led to the
FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner owns the motorcycle and it was given to a co-villager
for emergency purpose, nothing has been recovered from his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27834 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/4
conscious possession, he do not have criminal antecedent.
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
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 has no 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/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27834 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/4
Exclusive Special Court Excise Act-1, Saran at Chapra in
connection with Dighwara P.S. Case No. 115 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
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;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27834 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
4/4
(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…