Patna High Court

Chhotelal YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 12 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Chhotelal Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS No. 261/2025) under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly discarding 7.8 litres of country-made liquor. The prosecution alleged that 20 litres of liquor were recovered from three persons and that the petitioner was responsible for the disposal. The petitioner contended that his name was disclosed by a co‑accused, he had no involvement, and that the prosecution had not complied with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; he also highlighted his three prior criminal antecedents. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the petitioner’s similar prior offences. The Court, considering the seriousness of the allegations and the petitioner’s criminal record, refused anticipatory bail but indicated that regular bail could be considered if he surrenders within four weeks.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case
Whether the prosecution complied with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in the anticipatory bail application
Impact of the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents on the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103

Subjects

anticipatory bail
regular bail
criminal antecedents
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita
Section 30(a)
Section 103
liquor offence
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16199 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Chhotelal Yadav S/o- Hari Yadav R/v- Jagarnathpur, Jagarnath Yadav, PS-
                 Gopalpur, District- Gopalganj

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Pronoti Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-03-2026             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State.

                           2.       The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Gopalpur PS Case No. 261 of 2025 instituted for the

                   offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

                   Act.

                           3.       The prosecution case, in short, is that total 20.00

                   litres of liquor was recovered from three persons, out of which it

                   is alleged that 7.800 liters of country made liquor was recovered

                   which petitioner allegedly threw on the road.

                           4.       Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

                   the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

                   The name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16199 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                            2/3




          disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person. The

          petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of

          liquor. The petitioner has three (3) criminal antecedents. There

          is no compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika

          Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner,

          therefore, contends that prima-facie no case is made out against

          the petitioner. Other co-accused has been granted regular bail by

          this Court vide order dated 01.12.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No.

          81956 of 2025.

                  5.      Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

          the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is fervently

          submitted that petitioner bears three criminal antecedent/s that

          too of the similar nature, hence, he does not deserve the

          privilege of anticipatory bail.

                  6.      Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case as also taking into account the fact that petitioner

          bears three criminal antecedents of the similar nature, this Court

          is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer

          for grant of anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

                  7.      However, if the petitioner surrenders before the

          court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays

          for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16199 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the

                     order of this Court.



                                                                 (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…