Patna High Court
Kishan kumar Mandal @ Nunu Mandal @ Kishan MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail could be granted despite Section 76(2) because no offence under the Act was made out against the petitioner.
Summary
Kishan Kumar Mandal applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition Excise Act alleging his involvement in the seizure of 125.100 litres of Nepali liquor. The prosecution’s case is based on a chowkidar’s identification, but no liquor was recovered from the petitioner’s conscious possession. The petitioner argued that the allegation is unfounded and relied on the Full Bench judgment 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 High Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs 5,000 contribution to the District Legal Services Authority for flower pots and a set of standard bail conditions. The order also directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and to comply with attendance and non‑interference requirements.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition Excise Act to an anticipatory bail application?
- Whether the FIR, based solely on a chowkidar’s identification without seizure from the petitioner, justifies denial of anticipatory bail?
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition Excise Act
- Section 76(2)
- FIR
- seizure
- bail conditions
- District Legal Services Authority
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90717 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2025 Thana- RAHIKA District- Madhubani
======================================================
Kishan kumar Mandal @ Nunu Mandal @ Kishan Mandal Son of Bechan
Mandal Village- Dumri ward no6, PS -Rahika, District -Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard Mr. Ravi Ranjan, learned Counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Rahika P.S. Case No. 232 of 2025 for the offence
registered under sections 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition Excise Act
lodged on 22.10.2025 by the informant, Anand Kumar Kashyap.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police on secret
information, raided the place. Accused managed to escape but
the Chowkidar named him, it was petitioner. 125.100 liter
Nepali liquor recovered/seized. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession, only
due to enmity, the Chowkidar named him.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90717 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
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. The last submission is that without accepting the
allegation and/or the outcome of the present case, the
petitioner(s) intends to contribute Rs. 5,000/- to the District
Legal Services Authority, Madhubani for the purchase of flower
pots in the Civil Court Campus of Madhubani Judgeship
through Demand Draft issued by the local branch of the State
Bank of India/any Nationalized Bank.
7. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.
8. 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, FIR is there, he shall be facing the trial, in that
background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of
anticipatory bail with conditions subject to payment of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90717 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
5,000/- to the District Legal Services Authority, Madhubani for
the purchase of flower pots/ in the Civil Court Campus of
Madhubani Judgeship as undertaken by the petitioner(s)
through the learned counsel through Demand Draft issued by
the local branch of the State Bank of India/any Nationalized
Bank and the receipt of the expenditure shall be submitted to the
Trial Court by the DLSA, Madhubani.
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
satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Act,
Madhubani in connection with Rahika P.S. Case No. 232 of
2025 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 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;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90717 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
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;
(iv) 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;
(v) 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.
10. Let a copy of this order be sent to learned Principal
District and Sessions Judge, Madhubani for his perusal and
needful.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…