Patna High Court
Kripanand YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Kripanand Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 270 litres of liquor from his auto. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and was unaware that another person, Rambharose, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offence was serious. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and a six‑week window for surrender, pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the liquor, suffices to deny culpability
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS are appropriate
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14726 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-208 Year-2024 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani
======================================================
Kripanand Yadav S/o- Subansh Yadav R/v- Bishanpur PS- Laukaha District-
Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Advocate
Ms. Nitu Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, APP
======================================================
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
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 270 liters of liquor from an Auto.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14726 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Rambharose 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 Ladaniya
P.S. Case No. 208 of 2024 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14726 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
3/3
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…