Patna High Court
Keshav Yadav @ Keshav Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Petitioner Keshav Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Sections 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 25.875 litres of liquor from an orchard not belonging to him. He argued that the recovery was not from his possession, that the chaukidar who implicated him had a hostile relationship, and that the police had not conducted a proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.35,000 and two sureties, and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. It stipulated that if the antecedent exceeds seven cases, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed immediately. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent of seven cases affects the confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
- criminal antecedent
- liquor seizure
- police investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14687 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2025 Thana- MANIGACHI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Keshav Yadav @ Keshav Kumar Yadav S/o Late Shiv Kumar Yadav R/o
Village - Gopalpur, P.S - Manigachhi, District - Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Praveen, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suman Kumari Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 Sections 30(a) and
30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of seven cases out of which one case is
under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 25.875
litres of liquor from an orchard.
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 at
the instance of the Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14687 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
2/3
term. It is next submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is
also submitted that off late the police have started implicating
accused having criminal antecedent under the Excise Act for
obvious reason without holding a proper investigation.
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, 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.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty-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 Manigachhi P.S.
Case No. 182 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
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 seven
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14687 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
3/3
cases, 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 seven cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…