Chhote Kumar @ Chhote Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35040 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2026 Thana- NARHATT District- Nawada ====================================================== Chhote Kumar @ Chhote Yadav Son o Balram Yadav Resident of VillageSaidpur, P.S.- Narhat, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 20-05-2026 Heard the parties through virtual mode.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Narhatt P.S. Case No. 121 of 2026 for the offence under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that, on secret information, the place of the petitioner was raided and from near the cow shed, 15 liters of mahua liquor recovered/seized. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a perusal of the FIR would show that it has been recovered/seized from an open place/cow shed and not from his conscious possession and he do not have any criminal antecedent.
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, Mr. Bharat Bhushan opposes the prayer submitting that the recovery is from the cow shed of the petitioner.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as also that the recovery is from an open place and the petitioner do not have any criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. If, however, 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
3/4 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 Excise Court-I, Nawada in connection with Narhatt P.S. Case No. 121 of 2026 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 be appearing before the Police Station as and when required for cooperating 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,
4/4 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) Adnan/- U T