Patna High Court
Sumit Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as no offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act is made out against the petitioner and he has no criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Kumar Singh, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 65 litres of country-made liquor seized from a two-wheeler he owned. He contended that the liquor was not in his conscious possession as the vehicle had been handed over to another person, and he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed, asserting ownership of the vehicle. Relying on the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which permits anticipatory bail despite the bar in Section 76(2) when no offence is made out, the court examined the facts. Finding no evidence of possession by the petitioner and noting his clean antecedent, the court granted anticipatory bail with a set of strict conditions. The order remains subject to revocation if the petitioner is later found to have a criminal antecedent or violates any condition.
Issues considered
- Can anticipatory bail be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2) when no offence is made out?
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and clean criminal record justify the grant of anticipatory bail?
- What conditions should be imposed on the anticipatory bail to safeguard the investigation?
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- section 30(a)
- section 76(2)
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- excise law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8412 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2024 Thana- UDAKISHUNGANJ District-
Madhepura
======================================================
Sumit Kumar Singh Son of Upendra Singh Resident of Village- Adabari Tola
Patraha, P.S.- Choutham, District- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surya Narayan Yadav, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Udakishunganj P.S. Case No. 132 of 2024 for
the offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, a two wheeler was
intercepted and there is recovery/seizure of 65 liter country
made liquor. Petitioner being the owner, the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
being the owner, got implicated. Nothing has been recovered
from his conscious possession, he had given the motorcycle to
Nitish Kumar who was caught with it.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8412 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/4
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 he
is the owner of the vehicle.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that the petitioner do not have criminal antecedent, nothing
has been recovered from his conscious possession, in that
background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of
anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. However, if it is found that contrary to the statement
made in paragraph 3, the petitioner has criminal antecedent, the
present order shall become infructuous.
9. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8412 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/4
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-V-cum-Special
Judge (Excise)-I, Madhepura in connection with Udakishunganj
P.S. Case No. 132 of 2024 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(s) shall be appearing before the
Police Station as and when required for co-operating 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.8412 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
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)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…