RAVI YADAV AND ANOTHER vs State of Bihar — 711/2026

Case under Excise Act (Bihar) Section 30A. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRBJ010039912026

Filing Number

3229/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

711/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Court

Bhojpur DJ Division

Judge

25-Special Judge Excise Court N-I

Decision Date

19-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

21

Police Station

DHOBAHA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Excise Act (Bihar) Section 30A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAVI YADAV AND ANOTHER

    Adv. MUKESH KUMAR SINGH

  2. 2.VIKASH YADAV

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The Exclusive Special Excise Court-1, Bhojpur rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Ravi Yadav and Vkash Yadav, who were booked under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act 2018 for recovery of 21.750 liters of English wine. The court found the petitioners named in the FIR with substantive evidence of the recovered contraband, and considering their criminal antecedents and the strength of the prosecution case, declined to grant anticipatory bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Special Judge Excise Court N-I

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Special Judge Excise Court N-I

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 711/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Exclusive Special Excise Court-1, Bhojpur rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Ravi Yadav and Vkash Yadav, who were booked under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act 2018 for recovery of 21.750 liters of English wine. The court found the petitioners named in the FIR with substantive evidence of the recovered contraband, and considering their criminal antecedents and the strength of the prosecution case, declined to grant anticipatory bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case