Patna High Court
Rajo Prasad @ Raju ChauhanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajo Prasad, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act concerning the seizure of 750 ml of foreign liquor from a motorcycle driven by his son Navin. The prosecution alleged that the motorcycle, registered in the petitioner's name, was used to transport the liquor, leading to an FIR. The petitioner argued that he had no involvement and relied on the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which allows anticipatory bail despite the bar in Section 76(2) if the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. The State opposed, contending ownership of the vehicle implicated the petitioner. The court, considering the precedent and the lack of criminal antecedent, granted anticipatory bail with a set of stringent conditions, including bond, sureties, regular appearances, and non‑interference with witnesses.
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 the petitioner is liable for the offence alleged in the FIR given that the seized liquor was found on his son’s motorcycle registered in his name.
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)
- seizure of liquor
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38795 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2026 Thana- HALSI District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Rajo Prasad @ Raju Chauhan S/O - Late Karu Prasad R/O Vill - Bandol, P.S -
Halsi, Dist- Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Sahay, Advocate
: Mr. Vivek Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Rishika Arya, Advocate
: Mr. Umesh Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 Heard Mr. Brajesh Sahay, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Halsi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2026 for the offence
under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
lodged on 09.04.2026 by the informant, Rajeshwar Ram.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the Police intercepted a motorcycle and there is
recovery/seizure of 750 ml foreign liquor. Navin was driving the
motorcycle who was arrested. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Navin is his son while the motorcycle is registered in his name
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38795 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/4
and that is the reason why he has been implicated in the case.
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 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 the
petitioner owns the motorcycle.
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/seizure is from Navin, 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 District and Additional Sessions Judge-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38795 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/4
IV-cum-Special Excise Court, 1st, Lakhisarai in connection with
Halsi 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
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;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38795 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
4/4
(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/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.