Patna High Court
Laxman KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted as the petitioner had no criminal antecedent and the FIR did not establish an offence under the Act.
Summary
Laxman Kumar sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after a seized motorcycle, allegedly stolen by him, was found with 150 litres of illicit liquor. He contended the bike was stolen on 01.02.2024 and he had lodged a complaint, asserting no involvement in the seizure and no prior criminal record. The State argued that ownership of the vehicle, as per the registration, implicated him and that Section 76(2) of the Act barred anticipatory bail. Relying on the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, the court held that anticipatory bail could be granted despite the statutory bar if the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and several conditions regarding sureties, appearance before police and courts, and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar in Section 76(2).
- Whether ownership of the vehicle implicated the petitioner under section 30(a).
- Whether the FIR allegations constitute an offence under section 30(a) of the Act.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- section 30(a)
- section 76(2)
- stolen vehicle
- illicit liquor seizure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8553 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-691 Year-2024 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
Laxman Kumar S/o- Kailash Yadav Resident of Village- Kaji Bigha, P.S-
Fatehpur, District- Gayaji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand, 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 Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 691 of 2024 for the offence under
sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, on secret information, a
motorcycle was intercepted and there is recovery/seizure of 150 liter
country made liquor. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
motorcycle was stolen on 01.02.2024 for which he had already made
a complaint before the SHO, Vishnu Pad P.S. Gaya. He has nothing
to do with the recovery nor has criminal antecedent.
5. Further, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8553 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
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
being the owner and registration is in his name, cannot exonerate
himself from the alleged act.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties and
the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as also the
materials, as recorded above, this petitioner has no criminal
antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him
the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. 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 satisfaction of learned
Court of Exclusive Special Excise, Court No. 4, Gaya in connection
with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 691 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;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8553 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
(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;
(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…