Patna High Court

Sarjun YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 21 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Sarjun Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 65 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had a clean criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor, and was implicated merely because he owned the vehicle, which was allegedly misused by another person. The State opposed the bail application. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedent within six weeks. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances alleged.
Whether ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the contraband, suffices for arrest under the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the CrPC are appropriate.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail conditions
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
ownership of vehicle
criminal antecedent
Section 482(2) CrPC

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1233 of 2026
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2025 Thana- KOTHI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Sarjun Yadav S/O Aditya Yadav R/O Village- Jolahtetariya, P.S.- Pratappur,
                 Dist.- Chatra, Jharkhand.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Sudhir Kumar Sinha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   21-01-2026               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 Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 65 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.

                             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 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 would use

                   his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1233 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that Musafir would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged,

          who was also apprehended from the spot.

                   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 before the learned trial court

          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 Kothi

          P.S. Case No. 51 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 even one case

          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 is a
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1233 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…