RANJAN TIWARI vs State of Bihar — 377/2026

Case under Bihar Prohibition of Excise Act 2016 Section 30A. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRGO010020782026

Filing Number

1974/2026

Filing Date

11-Feb-2026

Registration No

377/2026

Registration Date

11-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Gopalganj

Judge

6-ADJ-IV Cum Excise Act Special Court No.-2

Decision Date

11-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 18-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

9

Police Station

MOHAMMADPUR

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bihar Prohibition of Excise Act 2016 Section 30A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RANJAN TIWARI

    Adv. DURGA NANDAN TIWARI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    Order

    Summary: The Exclusive Special Excise Court-II, Gopalganj rejected Ranjan Tiwari's anticipatory bail petition in an excise violation case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018. The court found that the petitioner fled from the spot when police discovered an illegal liquor manufacturing setup containing 2,000 KG mahua and 30 liters of country-made liquor, and was identified by independent witnesses. The court held that anticipatory bail is not maintainable under Section 76(2) of the Excise Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    ADJ-IV Cum Excise Act Special Court No.-2

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    Awaiting for L. C. R.

    ADJ-IV Cum Excise Act Special Court No.-2

  5. 12-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 11-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 377/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Exclusive Special Excise Court-II, Gopalganj rejected Ranjan Tiwari's anticipatory bail petition in an excise violation case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018. The court found that the petitioner fled from the spot when police discovered an illegal liquor manufacturing setup containing 2,000 KG mahua and 30 liters of country-made liquor, and was identified by independent witnesses. The court held that anticipatory bail is not maintainable under Section 76(2) of the Excise Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case