Patna High Court
Jitendra Sharma @ Jitendra Kumar SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted as the allegations did not constitute an offence under the Act and the petitioner had no possession or antecedent.
Summary
Jitendra Sharma sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 16,500 litres of foreign liquor. The prosecution claimed the liquor was recovered from the scene, but the petitioner asserted that nothing was found in his conscious possession and he has no criminal antecedent. The court referred to the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which 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 and clean record, the court inclined to grant anticipatory bail with strict conditions. The order directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and comply with several attendance and conduct conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2).
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute an offence under Section 30(a) of the Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and absence of criminal antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory 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)
- bail conditions
- foreign liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34582 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2026 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
Jitendra Sharma @ Jitendra Kumar Sharma Son of Binda Sharma Resident of
Village- Pipra, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya Ji.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
.. ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : None
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 19-05-2026 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though
learned APP for the State is present.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 115 of 2026 for the
offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act lodged on 03.03.2026 by the informant, Satin Prasad.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police on secret
information reached the place of occurrence and behind straw,
there is recovery/seizure of 16.500 litre foreign liquor. This led
to the FIR.
4. The case of the petitioner is that nothing has been
recovered from his conscious possession and he do not have
criminal antecedent.
5. Further, this Court 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.34582 of 2026(2) dt.19-05-2026
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.
7. Taking into account the aforesaid facts and the
judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as also that
nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession and
he do not have 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. 4,
Gaya in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 115 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;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34582 of 2026(2) dt.19-05-2026
3/3
(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;
(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/Anjali
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.