Patna High Court

Amar Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.

Summary

Amar Kumar Yadav sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 274, 275(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of liquor recovered from two individuals and a motorcycle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent and that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, merely that he owned the vehicle used by the accused. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directing the trial court to verify his antecedents. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed immediately.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged liquor possession and vehicle ownership
Whether ownership of the vehicle implicates the petitioner in the offence
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275(5)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
liquor seizure
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10306 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2025 Thana- MADHWAPUR District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Amar Kumar Yadav S/o Lalit Kumar Yadav R/o Vill - Mahuliya, Tilhat, P.S-
                 Phulparas, Distt- Madhubani

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Ms. Kumari Pallavi
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Umeshanand Pandit
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   16-03-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 274, 275,

                   3(5) of BNS and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise

                   Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 17.85 litres of liquor from possession of Md. Imtiaz

                   and Md. Kadir and 2.755 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It

                   is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot

                   as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession

                   and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner

                   of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10306 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
                                            2/3




          would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and

          thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get

          implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was

          completely unaware that Rabin would misuse his vehicle in the

          manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot,

          who was also apprehended from the spot.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) with

          two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

          learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in

          connection with Madhwapur P.S. Case No.28/2025, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the

          B.N.S.S.

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

          shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one

          case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10306 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                       concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

                       provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

                       on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean

                       antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                       shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…