Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Avadh Rai @ Avadh Kumar Rai @ Awadh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted because the seizure was not linked to the petitioner's possession.

Summary

The petitioner, Avadh Rai, was named in an FIR for alleged illegal manufacture and trade of illicit liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 (Amended), with 354 litres of liquor seized from a pick‑up van. The petitioner contended that the seized liquor was not in his conscious possession and that his name appeared only based on villagers' statements, with no independent witnesses supporting the seizure list. He applied for anticipatory bail, while the Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the relief. The court observed that the recovery of liquor prima facie did not arise from the petitioner's possession and therefore granted anticipatory bail, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, to be filed within four weeks. The bail was ordered under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the seized illicit liquor is not shown to be in the petitioner's possession.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent precludes the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • illegal liquor
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • seizure
  • possession
  • bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44751 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2025 Thana- KARJA District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Avadh Rai @ Avadh Kumar Rai @ Awadh Kumar Yadav, S/o Yogendra Ray,
                 Resident of Village - Mahmadpur Baya, P.S. - Saraiya, District - Muzaffarpur.

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No. II, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mrs. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   07-07-2026                        Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and

                   apprehending his arrest in connection with Karja P.S. Case

                   No.27 of 2025 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar

                   Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022(Amended).

                                3. Allegation against the petitioner is to engage in

                   illegal trade/manufacturing of illicit liquor, where there is

                   recovery of 354 litres and 420 ml of IMFL/country-made

                   liquor.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for

                   the petitioner that the seized illicit liquor was recovered from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44751 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
                                            2/3




          a pick-up van bearing Registration No. BR33M-5927. It is

          further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the

          conscious possession of the petitioner. It is further submitted

          that the name of the petitioner surfaced solely on the

          disclosure made by the local villagers. It is also pointed out

          that seizure list appears doubtful being not supported by

          independent witnesses rather than by police personnel. The

          petitioner has one criminal antecedent, in which, he is on

          bail.

                       5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of anticipatory

          bail to the petitioner.

                       6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by

          taking note of fact as recovery of illicit liquor prima facie not

          appears to be made from physical possession of this

          petitioner, accordingly, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a

          period of four weeks from today, is directed to be released

          on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

          Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge Excise-II,
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44751 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
                                                        3/3




                      Muzaffarpur in connection with Karja P.S. Case No.27 of

                      2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

                      438(2) of the CrPC/under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.


                                                              (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
    Raushan/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.