Patna High Court
Vipin MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail, as the prosecution failed to demonstrate the statutory bar under Section 76(2) and the search‑seizure was procedurally defective.
Summary
Vipin Mandal applied for pre‑arrest bail after the police recovered five litres of illicit country‑made liquor from his residence in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The petitioner contended that the identification of his house was doubtful, no warrant or summons was served, and the search‑seizure record lacked signatures of family members, with only police personnel listed as witnesses. The State argued that the recovery demonstrated his involvement and that Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act barred anticipatory bail. The Court examined the deficiencies in the search‑seizure process, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the absence of material to invoke the statutory bar. Finding the prosecution’s case weak and the procedural lapses significant, the Court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail if arrested or surrendered within four weeks, subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The order also required one bailor to be a close family member of the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite the recovery of illicit liquor from his house.
- Whether Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act bars the grant of anticipatory bail in this case.
- Whether the search and seizure conducted by police complied with procedural requirements.
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)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal liquor
- search and seizure
- Section 76(2)
- Section 30(a)
- pre‑arrest bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36333 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2022 Thana- DHORAIYA District- Banka
======================================================
Vipin Mandal son of Arjun Mandal Resident of Village- Kharaundha P.S
-Dhoraiya, Dist- Banka
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 03-06-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through
virtual mode.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Dhoraiya P.S. Case No. 129 of 2022, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. In course of patrolling, on a secret information that
some persons are engaged in storing and selling of illicit liquor,
the police conducted raid. However, noticing the police party,
one person succeeded in fleeing away. On enquiry, the villagers
disclosed his name as ‘Vipin Mandal’ i.e. the present petitioner.
On search in the house of the petitioner, 5 liters of country made
liquor was recovered.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36333 of 2026(2) dt.03-06-2026
2/3
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
the very disclosure of the name of the petitioner by the local
villagers appears to be doubtful. Moreover, the entire case of
recovery from the house of the petitioner is wholly incorrect and
mala fide for the simple reason that had the recovery been made
from the house of the petitioner, there would have been
signature of the family members on the search and seizure, but
surprisingly, the seizure list witnesses are none else but the
police personnels. It is further submitted that no summons or
any bailable or non-bailable warrant have ever been served upon
the petitioner and in fact, he was not aware with regard to
institution of the present case. The petitioner bears fair
antecedent and undertakes that he will fully co-operate in the
proceeding of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that recovery
of illicit wine from the house of the petitioner clearly suggest
his complicity, besides there is an express bar to maintain
anticipatory bail under Section 76(2) of Bihar Prohibition and
Excise (Amendment) Act.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on
behalf of the parties and considering the deficiencies in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36333 of 2026(2) dt.03-06-2026
3/3
search and seizure, coupled with the fact that the witnesses are
none else but the police personnels and, moreover, the
petitioners bears fair antecedent and there is lack of cogent
materials attracting the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, let the
petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his
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/- (ten thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court-1, Banka in
connection with Dhoraiya P.S. Case No. 129 of 2022, 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
petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.