Patna High Court

RAHUL YADAVversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of his antecedent, and the order will be confirmed if he is found to have a clean record.

Summary

The petitioner, Rahul Yadav, was implicated in a case alleging the recovery of 414.720 litres of liquor from a Tata Magic vehicle under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the vehicle, and has a clean criminal antecedent. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering these 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. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will be cancelled; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order is made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances
Whether the lack of possession and clean antecedent justify granting bail
Whether the trial court should verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming bail

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30
Section 482
clean antecedent
seizure of liquor
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14382 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-409 Year-2025 Thana- SISWAN District- Siwan
                 ======================================================
                 RAHUL YADAV S/o- Late Bhikhari Yadav R/v- Gyaspur Mathia Ps- Siswan
                 Dist- Siwan

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Arbind Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Nitya Nand Tiwary
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-03-2026               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 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 414.720 litres of liquor from a Tata Magic vehicle.

                             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

                   the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated at the instance

                   of local people, but then the name of the person, who disclosed

                   the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR, which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14382 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                            2/3




          casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when

          petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.

                   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. 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 Siswan P.S. Case No. 409 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 person with clean

          antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14382 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…