← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./8507/2026bail granted

Shailesh Kumar @ Billa v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-17Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8507 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2026 Thana- HARNAUT District- Nalanda ====================================================== Shailesh Kumar @ Billa Son of Bhosa Yadav Resident of VillageSabnahuadih, P.S.- Harnaut, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ganesh Sharma, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 17-02-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Harnaut P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025 for the offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution story, on secret information, the place was raided and outside the house of the petitioner, there is recovery/seizure of 12 liter foreign liquor. The Mahal Chowkidar named this petitioner. This led to the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he do not have criminal antecedent and nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession, only because the Mahal Chowkidar named him, got implicated.

5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on

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 learned Sessions Judge order shows that he has criminal antecedent.

7. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has made a categorical submission is paragraph 3 that the petitioner do not have criminal antecedent and it has been wrongly observed in learned Sessions Judge order. If it is found that he has criminal antecedent, the order may become infructuous, if relief is granted to him.

8. Taking into account the submissions of the parties and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as also the materials on record, nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession nor he has criminal antecedent, as submitted, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend

3/4 him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.

9. 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.

10. 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 District & Additional Sessions Judge-Vcum-Special Judge Excise-I, Biharsharif, Nalanda/Court concerned in connection with Harnaut P.S. Case No. 02 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(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

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; (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