Patna High Court

Yash KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 27 February 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the number of prior cases.

Summary

The petitioner, Yash Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a public pond not in his possession. He has two prior cases under the Excise Act and claims the complaint was filed by an inimical chowkidar, raising doubts about the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail. The Court, applying Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if exactly two, it will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the applicable provisions.
Whether the conditions imposed, including verification of prior criminal cases, are appropriate.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30(a)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
criminal antecedents
bail conditions
public place

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12323 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-709 Year-2025 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Yash Kumar Son of Chhotelal Sahani @ Chotelal Sahni Resident of Village-
                 Kubara, Ward No. 17, P.S.- Harsidhi, District- East Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Parvin Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
                 ======================================================
                 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

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a place near

                   a pond. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested

                   from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious

                   possession and even alleged recovery is from a place which

                   does not belong to the petitioner and is accessible to public at

                   large and he came to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar

                   with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12323 of 2026(2) dt.27-02-2026
                                            2/3




          chowkidar was aware of 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.

                       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 before the learned Court below

          within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten 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 Harsidhi

          P.S. Case No.709/2025, 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 more than

          two cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner

          had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

          provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12323 of 2026(2) dt.27-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two

                       cases, 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…