Patna High Court
Mannu Yadav @ Manu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bond, sureties and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
Mannu Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging that 90 litres of liquor were recovered from a location not belonging to him and that the only evidence against him was a confessional statement made by Sagar Singh while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court considered the submissions and, invoking Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances Act, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If the trial court finds more than one prior case, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order is subject to verification of antecedents and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC/Section 482(2) BNSS in view of the alleged recovery of liquor and the confessional statement of a co-accused.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, if more than one case, warrants denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- confessional statement
- police custody
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12288 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-302 Year-2025 Thana- MANIHARI District- Katihar
======================================================
Mannu Yadav @ Manu Yadav S/o Late Hari Prasad Yadav R/o Village -
Mirzapur Mushahari Tola, P.S - Manihari, District - Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-02-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of
90 litres of liquor from a sack.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner. It is
further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the
confessional statement of Sagar Singh in police custody which does
not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12288 of 2026(2) dt.27-02-2026
2/2
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let 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.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Manihari P.S.
Case No. 302 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, it would be
presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this
Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is
found on verification that petitioner has antecedent of only one case
in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…