Vikram Yadav @ Bikram Yadav @ Vikram Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10543 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2025 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Vikram Yadav @ Bikram Yadav @ Vikram Kumar Singh S/o Bhola Yadav @
                 Jai Prakash Bhuwan R/o vill - Sagarpur, P.S.- Sakri, Distt.- Madhubani at
                 present R/o vill - Pandaul, P.s.- Pandaul, Distt.- Madhubani

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Arvind Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Narsingh Tanti
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-02-2026               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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a),

                   41(1), 31(1), 31(2) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of fifteen cases out of which thirteen

                   cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of

                   3062.52 litres of liquor from two Scorpio vehicles and a

                   varandah.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10543 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                            2/3




          any of the seized vehicles and even the house from where the

          recovery is alleged to have been made does not belong to the

          petitioner and he came to be implicated at the instance of

          Chowkidar but then it is submitted that if the Chowkidar was

          aware about the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence,

          then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the

          instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the

          prosecution. It is further submitted that once an accused is

          implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts

          implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar,

          local person, confessional statement or secret information

          without holding a proper investigation. It is also submitted that

          petitioner earlier also came to be implicated in a similar manner.

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

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                   6.     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. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy-five

          Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10543 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                                          3/3




                        pending/successor court in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case

                        No. 283 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under

                        Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                                 7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

                        shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

                        event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than

                        fifteen cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the

                        purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent

                        before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order

                        shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that

                        petitioner has antecedent of fifteen cases in that event the

                        provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T