Patna High Court
Munna Yadav @ Munna KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that the seizure does not prima facie demonstrate the petitioner's possession, and therefore granted anticipatory bail.
Summary
Munna Yadav was named in an FIR under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 for allegedly engaging in illegal liquor trade, with 60 litres of illicit liquor seized from a motorcycle. The petitioner contended that he neither owned nor was apprehended with the seized liquor and that there was no material linking him to the possession, arguing that the seizure list lacked independent witness support and was motivated by village politics. He sought anticipatory bail, citing a Supreme Court precedent (Prabhakar Tewari v. State of Uttar Pradesh). The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail. The High Court observed that the seizure did not prima facie establish the petitioner's possession and, despite his prior criminal cases, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond and conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the seizure of illicit liquor establishes a prima facie case of possession against the petitioner.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in the absence of material linking the petitioner to the alleged offence.
- Whether the petitioner's prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
- Applicability of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal liquor
- possession
- seizure
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedents
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 34562 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2026 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran
======================================================
Munna Yadav @ Munna Kumar, S/o Gopal Rai @ Gopal Prasad Yadav, R/o
vill- Siswa konhi, P.S.- Raxual, Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhannjay Kumar II, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 10-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Raxaul P.S. Case
No.171 of 2026 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act,2022.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is to engage in
illegal trade/manufacturing of illicit liquor, where there is
recovery of 60 litres of IMFL/country-made liquor.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner that the seized illicit liquor was recovered from
a Motorcycle. It is further submitted that the petitioner is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34562 of 2026(3) dt.10-07-2026
2/3
neither the owner nor was he apprehended on the spot, and
not on the basis of any material demonstrating his conscious
possession, involvement or complicity in the alleged offence.
It is further submitted that seizure list also appears doubtful
being not supported by independent witnesses rather than by
police personnel. It is also pointed out that the name of the
petitioner surfaced due to village politics. While concluding
the argument, it is submitted that merely on the ground of
criminal antecedents, as petitioner found involved in eleven
more cases, where he is on bail in ten cases except one
case, prayer of bail of petitioner should not ordinarily be
rejected, if merit of this case appears in favour of petitioner.
In support of his submission learned counsel relied upon the
legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as available
through Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
and Another, [(2020) 11 SCC 648].
5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as recovery of illicit liquor prima facie not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34562 of 2026(3) dt.10-07-2026
3/3
appears to be made from physical possession of this
petitioner, accordingly, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a
period of four weeks from today, is directed to be released
on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court
No.03, East Champaran in connection with Raxaul P.S. Case
No.171 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Raushan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.