Patna High Court
Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
Petitioner Sanjay Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. He argued that the alleged seizure of 36 litres of liquor occurred on land not owned by him, that he was not caught in possession, and that the complaint was based solely on the testimony of a chowkidar. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if exactly two are found, the bail will be confirmed. The order is subject to the provisions of Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in the present case involving alleged excise offences.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court, including verification of antecedent cases, are lawful and appropriate.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- seizure of liquor
- police investigation
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13324 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2026 Thana- LAKHNAUR District- Madhubani
======================================================
Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar Yadav S/o Ramsevak Yadav R/o Village-
Biharpur, Ward No 04, PS- Lakhnaur, Distt- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ratnakar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 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 and
275 of the BNS and 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 36 litres of liquor from an orchard.
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 villagers at large and
he came to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13324 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
whom he is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that once an
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police
starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local
person, confessional statement or secret information without
holding a proper investigation.
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.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 Lakhnaur P.S. Case No.1/2026, 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.13324 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
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
Checking your session…