Patna High Court
Shri Ram YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
Shri Ram Yadav, the registered owner of a truck, was implicated in a case where 597.960 liters of illicit liquor were seized from the vehicle. He was charged under Sections 30(a), 32(2) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and applied for anticipatory bail, asserting that he had no conscious possession of the liquor and that his clean antecedents warranted bail. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the large quantity of liquor recovered from a vehicle owned by the petitioner. The Patna High Court considered the seriousness of the offence and the ownership link, and concluded that the circumstances did not merit anticipatory bail. Consequently, the court rejected the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the owner of a vehicle from which a large quantity of illicit liquor was seized under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(2), 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- illicit liquor
- vehicle ownership
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39605 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2025 Thana- Jaitpur District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Shri Ram Yadav Son of Late Ram Nath Yadav Resident of Village- Bahiyari
Baghail, P.s.- Bhatpar Rani, District- Deoria (Uttar Pradesh) 274702
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Majid Mahboob Khan, Advocate
For the State : Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 23-06-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(2)
and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per prosecution case, 597.960 liters illicit liquor
was recovered from the seized truck of which this petitioner is
registered owner.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been
implicated in this case merely because he happens to be owner
of the vehicle in question. Nothing has been recovered from the
conscious possession of this petitioner. Petitioner claims clean
antecedents.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39605 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
2/2
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that huge quantity of liquor was
recovered from the seized truck of which this petitioner is
registered owner.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and the fact
that huge quantity of illicit liquor was recovered from the seized
vehicle of which this petitioner is registered owner, the prayer
for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.