Patna High Court
Ravi Shankar Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi ShankarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted as the petitioner was not the owner or driver and the FIR did not establish an offence under section 30(a), notwithstanding the bar in Section 76(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Ravi Shankar Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after police seized a litre of beer from a Scorpio vehicle. He contended that he was neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicle and was named only because the arrested individual, Ajay Kumar, implicated him. Relying on the Patna High Court’s Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which allows anticipatory bail despite the bar in Section 76(2) if no offence is established, the court examined the merits. The court found no evidence that the petitioner owned the vehicle or had a criminal antecedent and concluded that the FIR did not substantiate an offence against him. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with a set of stringent conditions regarding sureties, appearance before police and courts, and non‑interference with witnesses or evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar in Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement, given he is not the owner or driver, constitutes an offence under section 30(a).
- Whether the FIR allegations are sufficient to sustain a charge against the petitioner.
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)
- bail conditions
- vehicle seizure
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30601 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2025 Thana- KARTAHA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Ravi Shankar Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Shankar Son of Sri
Sachchidanand Prasad Singh @ Sachidanand Singh Resident of Village -Rain
Vishuni, Ward No 1, Ps- Runni Saidpur, District- Sitamarhi (Wrongly Typed
As District- Vaishali In Impugned Order)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 18-05-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection
with Kartahan P.S. Case No. 35 of 2025 for the offence under
sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police during the
evening patrolling, intercepted a Scorpio and there is
recovery/seizure of 1 liter Beer. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither
he is the owner nor the driver of the Scorpio but only because the
person, Ajay Kumar was apprehended, named him, he is now in the
present case.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30601 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
2/3
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 the
person arrested, named him.
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 own the vehicle nor has criminal antecedent, 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
Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 1-cum-Additional District &
Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Kartahan P.S.
Case No. 35 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(s) shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for co-operating in the investigation;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30601 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
3/3
(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)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.