Patna High Court
Ranjeet Yadav @ Ranjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bond conditions and verification of criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Ranjeet Yadav and Masudan Kumar, were implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering five litres of liquor near the Andhera river. They argued that they were not arrested on the spot, no liquor was found in their possession, and the alleged recovery site is a public place, contending that a hostile chowkidar falsely implicated them. The petitioners sought anticipatory bail, while the State opposed the relief. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs. 45,000 with two sureties each, and directed verification of their criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if the petitioners’ antecedents exceed the disclosed numbers, the bail would not be confirmed for the offending party.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged lack of possession and public nature of the recovery site justify anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- criminal antecedent
- public place
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15444 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2025 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Ranjeet Yadav @ Ranjeet Kumar S/o Surendra Yadav R/o Village -
Malbigha, P.S - Noorsarai, District - Nalanda
2. Masudan Kumar @ Masudan Yadav @ Madhusudan Kumar S/o Surendra
Yadav R/o Village - Malbigha, P.S - Noorsarai, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Satya Prakash
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Pushpa Sinha.1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of four cases out of which three
cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 2 has
antecedent of nine cases out of which seven cases are under the
Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 5 litres of liquor
from a place near Andhera river.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15444 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and is accessible to public at large and they came to
be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom they are
on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if the Chowkidar
was aware about the involvement of the petitioners in the
occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to
institution of the instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that once an
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police
starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of
Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 45,000/- (Rupees Forty-five
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15444 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case
No. 111 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the
event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more
than four cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than
nine cases then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner
who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but
after verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent
of four cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of nine cases in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…