Patna High Court
Rampukar Rai @ Rampukar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that the doubtful identification, open‑place recovery and procedural deficiencies preclude the operation of the bar under Section 76(2), and therefore granted bail to the petitioners.
Summary
Rampukar Rai and Lalan Rai were implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged trafficking of illicit country-made liquor after a police raid recovered 230 litres. The petitioners argued that their identification by a local chowkidar was doubtful and that the police failed to comply with Sections 103 and 105 of the B.N.S.S, rendering the seizure and search deficient. The State opposed anticipatory bail, citing four prior criminal antecedents and an express bar under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act. The High Court examined the lack of solid identification, the open‑place recovery, and procedural lapses, and concluded that the stringent conditions of Section 76(2) were not met. Consequently, the Court granted bail, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and the condition that one bailor be a close family member, under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail despite alleged involvement in illicit liquor trafficking under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the identification of the petitioners by the chowkidar complies with Sections 103 and 105 of the B.N.S.S.
- Whether the provisions of Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act bar the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act — s. 76(2)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- identification
- search and seizure
- illicit liquor
- excise law
- Section 30(a)
- Section 76(2)
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35662 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-537 Year-2025 Thana- KESARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Rampukar Rai @ Rampukar Yadav S/O Raghunath Rai @ Raghunath Ray
Resident of village- Kadhan, Ward No.-10, P.S- Kesariya, Dist.- East
Champaran.
2. Lalan Rai S/O Raghunath Rai @ Raghunath Ray Resident of village-
Kadhan, Ward No.-10, P.S- Kesariya, Dist.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sharda Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 02-06-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned Advocate for the
petitioners and Ms. Sharda Kumari, learned Additional Public
Prosecution for the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Kesariya P.S. Case No. 537 of 2025, registered for the
offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act.
3. The police on a tip off, regarding trafficking of
illicit wine, conducted raid over Kadhan Diyara area. After
noticing the police party, two persons succeeded in fleeing
away. The local chowkidar disclosed their name as the
petitioners. In course of search, total 230 litres country-made
chulai liquor was recovered.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35662 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026
2/3
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that
very identification of the petitioners by local chowkidar is
wholly doubtful, in as much as, there is no compliance of
Sections 103 and 105 of B.N.S.S. Admittedly, the alleged
recovery has been made from an open place which is easily
accessible to all and for that the petitioners cannot be held
responsible. It is submitted that only on account of past criminal
antecedent of identical nature as has been disclosed in paragraph
no. 3, the name of the petitioners have been implicated in this
case without there been any cogent material.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that
besides, the petitioners are carrying four criminal antecedents,
there is express bar to maintain anticipatory bail in terms with
Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment
Act.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note
of the fact that the alleged recovery has been made from an open
place; besides, the doubtful identification of the petitioners and
no other cogent materials which attract the rigors provided
under Section 76(2) of the Excise Amendment Act as also the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35662 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026
3/3
deficiency in the search and seizure, let the petitioners above
named be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 3, Civil
Court, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Kesariya
P.S. Case No. 537 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down
in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023, with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be
the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J)
sadique/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.