Patna High Court
Uday KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner’s prior similar offences and the nature of the case did not satisfy the criteria for such relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Uday Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in connection with an excise case where 2,640 litres of liquor were seized from two pickup vans. He contended that he was neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicles and was falsely implicated. The prosecution alleged his involvement in offences under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The petitioner also pointed out the lack of compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and highlighted his two prior criminal antecedents. The court, considering the seriousness of the alleged offence and the petitioner’s prior similar convictions, declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing that regular bail may be considered if he surrenders within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite alleged involvement in excise offences and prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether non‑compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedents
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 103
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4325 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-292 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya
======================================================
Uday Kumar Son of Amika Yadav @ Ambika Yadav Resident of Village-
Asurain, P.S.- Tankupa, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Gaya Excise P.S. Case No. 292 of 2025 instituted for the
offences under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that total 2640
litres of liquor was recovered from two pickup vans.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner is neither the
owner nor the driver of the vehicle. The other co-accused person
has already been granted bail by this court vide order dated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4325 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
2/2
27.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 80731/20225. The petitioner
has got no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. Learned
counsel, therefore, submitted that prima-facie, no case is made
out against the petitioner. The petitioner has two criminal
antecedents. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the
Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case as also the petitioner has two antecedents of similar
nature, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the
learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and
prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own
merit without being prejudiced by this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…