MP High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail In Illegal Liquor Recovery Case, Cites Statutory Bar

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a man accused of storing more than 65 litres of illicit liquor in a cattle shed, holding that courts cannot entertain such pleas in cases covered under Section 59-A(i) of the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act.

The Court observed that the statutory bar on anticipatory bail applies where the quantity of liquor seized exceeds fifty bulk litres and cautioned that such extraordinary protection cannot be granted in a routine manner.

Justice Ramkumar Choubey passed the order while dismissing the anticipatory bail application filed by Balloo alias Rampal Yadav, who apprehended arrest in connection with Crime No.146/2026 registered at Simariya Police Station in Panna district under Section 34(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act.

According to the prosecution, the police received information on April 12, 2026 that illicit liquor had been stored inside a tapra, or cattle shed, allegedly used by the applicant for housing buffaloes. Acting on the tip-off, a police team conducted a raid at around 8:30 pm. When the police reached the spot, two persons were allegedly seen there. One person escaped, while another man, identified as the applicant’s nephew Anuj Yadav, was caught while attempting to flee.

The police later searched the premises and allegedly recovered 65 litres and 700 millilitres of illegal liquor hidden inside a pit covered with a sheet. The seizure was carried out in the presence of witnesses, including Constable Ankit Patel and independent witness Raj Bahadur.

Appearing for the applicant, advocate Phool Chand Paliwal argued that his client had been falsely implicated only on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused. He submitted that the applicant runs a dairy business and no liquor was recovered directly from his possession. The counsel also argued that although the applicant had a criminal history, he had already been acquitted in most of those cases and only one matter remained pending.

Paliwal further relied on earlier orders passed by coordinate benches of the High Court in support of the plea for anticipatory bail in similar matters.

Opposing the application, Panel Lawyer Garima Tiwari argued that the liquor had been recovered from premises owned and occupied by the applicant, which clearly established his constructive possession over the seized material. She further submitted that the applicant had seven criminal cases against him, including four under the Excise Act, and stressed that Section 59-A(i) specifically bars anticipatory bail in such offences.

The High Court agreed with the State and observed that, at the stage of bail, the merits of the prosecution case are not required to be examined in detail. The Court noted that the liquor was allegedly recovered from a cattle shed owned by the applicant and therefore “it cannot be said that it is a case of no evidence qua the applicant.”

The Court also distinguished the earlier orders cited by the defence, observing that the coordinate benches had granted anticipatory bail without discussing the applicability of Section 59-A(i) of the Excise Act.

Quoting the statutory provision, the Court underlined that no anticipatory bail application can be entertained where a person is accused under Section 34(1)(a) or (b) and the quantity of liquor recovered exceeds fifty bulk litres.

The Court further referred to Supreme Court rulings in Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar and Tusharbhai Rajnikantbhai Shah v. Kamal Dayani, which caution courts against granting anticipatory bail as a matter of routine. The High Court observed, “the power to grant anticipatory bail should not be exercised in routine manner, but with great degree of circumspection.”

Holding that it was not lawful to entertain the plea in view of the statutory embargo, the Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application.

Case Titile: Balloo @ Rampal Yadav v. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Date of Order: May 13, 2026

Bench: Justice Ramkumar Choubey