Patna High Court
Rajeev Yadav @ Rajeev KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with conditions, holding that no offence was made out against him despite the Section 76(2) bar.
Summary
Petitioner Rajeev Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged involvement in the seizure of 346.5 litres of Nepal liquor. The prosecution alleged the vehicle was intercepted and the liquor recovered, but the petitioner claimed he was neither the owner nor driver and was named by locals. He relied on the Patna High Court Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar (2019 PLJR 1089) which allows anticipatory bail despite the bar in Section 76(2) if no offence is made out. The State opposed bail citing the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The court, considering the lack of ownership, absence of possession, and the cited precedent, granted anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and several conditions regarding appearance, cooperation, and non‑interference with witnesses.
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 non‑ownership and non‑possession of the seized liquor preclude the making out of an offence.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent bars 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
- seizure of liquor
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35055 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2026 Thana- BATHNAHA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Rajeev Yadav @ Rajeev Kumar Son of Late Balam Rai Resident of Village-
Bathnaha, East Ward No. 02, P.S.- Bathnaha, District- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, 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 Bathnaha P.S. Case No. 79 of 2026 for the offence
under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that a Maruti car was intercepted and there was recovery/seizure of
346.500 liters of Nepal liquor. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
neither he is the owner nor the driver of the vehicle but only due to
the locals gave his name, implicated.
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.35055 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
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 submitting that he
has criminal antecedent.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that he is neither the owner of the vehicle nor anything
recovered from his conscious possession, 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 Court of Exclusive Special Excise Court-I,
Sitamarhi/concerned Court in connection with Bathnaha P.S. Case
No. 79 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35055 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
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 T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.