Patna High Court
Ajit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as no offence under section 30(a) is made out against the petitioner and the bar under section 76(2) does not preclude relief in such circumstances.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajit Kumar, was named in an FIR under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly owning a boat used to transport a large consignment of illicit country-made liquor. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the liquor was seized from a static boat and not from his conscious possession, and that he has no criminal antecedent. The State opposed, asserting ownership of the boat. Relying on the Full Bench judgment in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which permits anticipatory bail despite the bar in section 76(2) when no offence is made out, the Court found no material to link the petitioner to the offence. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions, reserving the right to cancel the bail if a criminal antecedent is later discovered.
Issues considered
- Can anticipatory bail be granted under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar in section 76(2)?
- Is the petitioner liable under section 30(a) when the seized liquor was not in his conscious possession?
- Does the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent affect the grant of anticipatory bail?
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- section 30(a)
- section 76(2)
- contraband liquor
- boat ownership
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27857 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2026 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
Ajit Kumar S/o Jhimi Ray @ Jhimilal Ray R/o Hematpur, P.S.- Raghopur,
District- Vaishali A/P In front of H.P. petrol Pump, in Didarganj Police Station
jurisdiction, Simli Murarpur, P.S.- Didarganj, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kritu Verma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard Mr. Kritu Verma, learned counsel for the
petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Nadi P.S. Case No. 77 of 2026 for the offence
under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
lodged on 01.03.2026 by the informant, Devkaran Banti.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant came to
know that from a boat, a big consignment of country made
liquor is coming. Accordingly, it was raided and from 21 bags,
1260 country made mahua recovered/seized. Upon inquiry, the
locals informed that the boat belongs to this petitioner. This led
to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27857 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/4
to a local politics, he has been named in the FIR as a boat
owner. He has recorded in paragraph 8 that the petitioner has no
concerned with the said boat. Further, even otherwise a
recovery/seizure is from a static boat near the river and not from
the conscious possession and the last submission is that he do
not have any 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 as
per the FIR, he owns the boat.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that nothing has been recovered from his conscious
possession nor he has criminal antecedent, in that background,
this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27857 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/4
bail with conditions.
8. If, however, it is found that contrary to the
statement made in paragraph-3, the petitioner has criminal
antecedent, the present order shall become infructuous.
9. 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 Exclusive Special Judge, Excise, Patna
City in connection with Nadi P.S. Case No. 77 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27857 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
4/4
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;
(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)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…