Patna High Court
Praveen AnandversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as the FIR does not establish an offence and no possession is shown, subject to statutory conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Praveen Anand was implicated in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act for the alleged seizure of 112.320 litres of whisky. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming no prior criminal record and lack of actual possession of the seized liquor. The State opposed, alleging antecedents. The court, relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, held that anticipatory bail can be granted despite the bar in Section 76(2) when the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a payment of Rs.15,000 to the District Legal Services Authority and a series of strict conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., including surety bonds and regular appearances.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail is permissible under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act despite Section 76(2) bar.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession and clean antecedent justify granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed, including payment to the Legal Services Authority, are lawful.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act — s. 30(a), 41(1), 76(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act
- seizure of liquor
- Section 438 CrPC
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43920 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2026 Thana- GORIAKOTHI District- Siwan
======================================================
Praveen Anand Son of Mithilesh Kumar Chaubey Resident of Village -
Sadatpur, P.S. - Kanti, District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajiv Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Nityanand, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Goriakothi P.S. Case No. 43 of 2026 instituted under
Section 30(a), 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Amendment Act lodged on 22.02.2026 by the informant,
Manish Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, police intercepted a
car and recovery/seizure 112.320 liter of wishky. This led to the
FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
do not have criminal antecedent and only because of ownership,
he got implicated. Further, the last submission is that without
accepting the allegation and/or the outcome of the present case,
the petitioner intends to contribute Rs. 15000/- to the District
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43920 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/4
Legal Services Authority, Muzaffarpur for purchase of flower
pots of the Civil Court Campus of Muzaffarpur Judgeship
through Demand Draft issued by the local branch of the State
Bank of India.
5. 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 has criminal antecedent.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that nothing has been recovered from his conscious
possession, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend
him the privilege of anticipatory bail subject to payment of
Rs.15000/- to the District Legal Services Authority, Muzaffarpur
for purchase of flower pots of the Civil Court Campus of
Muzaffarpur Judgeship through Demand Draft issued by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43920 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
3/4
local branch of the State Bank of India.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail, in the event
of his arrest or surrender before the concerned court 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
the like amount each in connection with Goriakothi P.S. Case
No. 43 of 2026 to the satisfaction of Exclusive Special Excise
Court No.1, Siwan in Goriakothi subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also the other
conditions.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Driving License/Voter ID/Pan Card
etc.) 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43920 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
4/4
police station every day for one month and later every fortnight
for next six months to mark his attendance and at the end of the
period a certificate be submitted before the Trial Court failing
which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation
of 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;
(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.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned
Principal District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur for his
perusal and needful.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-Ankita
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.