Patna High Court
Raushan Kumar @ Roushan KumarversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted despite the bar under section 76(2) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute an offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Raushan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after police seized 750 ml of foreign liquor from a motorcycle. He contended he neither owned the vehicle nor had any criminal antecedent, alleging the accusation stemmed from personal enmity. The State opposed the bail. Relying on the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, the court examined whether anticipatory bail can be granted despite the bar under section 76(2) of the Act when the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. The court held that anticipatory bail is permissible in such circumstances and, noting the petitioner’s clean record, granted bail with stringent conditions. The order remains subject to revocation if the petitioner is found to have a criminal antecedent or violates any condition.
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?
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement in the seizure of foreign liquor warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 76(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- section 30(a)
- section 76(2)
- seizure of foreign liquor
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29535 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2024 Thana- KASHICHAK District- Nawada
======================================================
Raushan Kumar @ Roushan Kumar S/O Anuj Prasad Resident Of Village -
Madhepura, P.S- Kashichak, District - Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection
with Kashichak P.S. Case No. 149 of 2024 for the offence under
section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police intercepted a
motorcycle and there is recovery/seizure of 750 ml foreign liquor.
This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither
he owns the vehicle nor he has criminal antecedent but only due to
enmity, the arrested person named him.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29535 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
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.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties and
the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as also that
he do not have any criminal antecedent, in that background, this
Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory 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 Court Excise-2, Nawada in connection with
Kashichak P.S. Case No. 149 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29535 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
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;
(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
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.