Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Dilip KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail may be granted where the allegations do not constitute an offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, notwithstanding the bar under section 76(2).

Summary

The petitioner, Dilip Kumar, was implicated in a case (PS Case No 103 2024) for alleged possession of 4.5 litres of foreign liquor seized from a pick‑up van, under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He contended that he had sold the vehicle in 2014 and that the registration was never transferred, so he had no possession of the liquor and no criminal antecedent. The State argued that he still owned the vehicle. Relying on the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav vs State of Bihar, the Court held that anticipatory bail can be granted despite the bar in section 76(2) if the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. Considering the lack of possession, clean record and the precedent, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a set of strict conditions. The order directs the petitioner to surrender within four weeks, furnish bail bond and sureties, and comply with attendance and conduct requirements.

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 petitioner can be said to have committed an offence under section 30(a) given he no longer owned the vehicle and had no possession of the seized liquor.
  • Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal record and lack of recovered contraband justify the grant of anticipatory bail.

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • section 30(a)
  • section 76(2)
  • vehicle registration
  • seizure of liquor
  • criminal antecedent
  • bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27835 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2024 Thana- CHORAUT District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Dilip Kumar S/O Late Vinod Ram R/O- Pachra Nimahi Sulipgadha, P.S-
                 Bajpatti, Dist- Sitamarhi.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s      :       Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate
                                           :       Mr. Aditya Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the State             :       Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   29-04-2026                          Heard Mr. Aditya Kumar Pandey, learned counsel

                   for the petitioner and learned APP representing the State.

                                  2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Chouraut P.S. Case No. 103 of 2024 for the

                   offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

                   Act lodged on 06.09.2024 by the informant, Ajit Kumar.

                                  3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged

                   that on secret informant intercepted a Pick-Up Van and

                   recovered/seized 4.5 liter foreign liquor. This led to the FIR.

                                  4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   though he earlier own the vehicle, it was later sold in the year

                   2014 to one Surendra Mandal but the said person failed to get

                   the registration transferred which made him accused in this case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27835 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
                                            2/4




          Last submission is that 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 he

          owns the vehicle.

                       7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties

          and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as

          also the fact that he do not have criminal antecedent and nothing

          has been recovered from his conscious possession, in that

          background, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27835 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
                                            3/4




          satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Exclusive Excise Court-

          02, Sitamarhi in connection with Chouraut P.S. Case No. 103 of

          2024 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.27835 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


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.