Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Chhote Kumar @ Chhote YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as the seizure was from an open place, no conscious possession was established, and the petitioner had no criminal antecedent, thereby no offence under Section 30(a) was made out.

Summary

The petitioner, Chhote Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after 15 litres of mahua liquor were seized from an open cow‑shed on his premises. The prosecution alleged the seizure indicated an offence, while the petitioner contended the liquor was not in his conscious possession and he had no prior criminal record. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar (2019 (2) PLJR 1089), which permits anticipatory bail despite the bar in Section 76(2) if no offence is made out, the court examined the facts. Finding the recovery from an open place and noting the petitioner’s clean antecedent, the court granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions. The order also stipulated that the bail would become void if a criminal antecedent were later discovered.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2).
  • Whether seizure of liquor from an open cow‑shed, absent conscious possession, constitutes an offence under Section 30(a).
  • Whether the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • Section 30(a)
  • Section 76(2)
  • seizure
  • open place
  • criminal antecedent
  • bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35040 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2026 Thana- NARHATT District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Chhote Kumar @ Chhote Yadav Son o Balram Yadav Resident of Village-
                 Saidpur, P.S.- Narhat, District- Nawada

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-05-2026                  Heard the parties through virtual mode.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Narhatt P.S. Case No. 121 of 2026 for the

                   offence under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

                   Act.

                                3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged

                   that, on secret information, the place of the petitioner was raided

                   and from near the cow shed, 15 liters of mahua liquor

                   recovered/seized. This led to the FIR.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a

                   perusal of the FIR would show that it has been recovered/seized

                   from an open place/cow shed and not from his conscious

                   possession and he do not have any criminal antecedent.

                                5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35040 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
                                            2/4




          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, Mr. Bharat Bhushan opposes the

          prayer submitting that the recovery is from the cow shed of the

          petitioner.

                        7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties

          and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as

          also that the recovery is from an open place and the petitioner

          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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35040 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
                                            3/4




          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-I,

          Nawada in connection with Narhatt P.S. Case No. 121 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

          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,
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35040 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
                                                      4/4




                    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


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.