Patna High Court

Sunil YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

The petitioner, Sunil Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 200 litres of liquor from a hut adjacent to his house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the location did not belong to him, and he has a clean criminal antecedent. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order is subject to Section 482(2) of the BNSS and the trial court’s verification.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a location not owned by the petitioner justifies denial of bail
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants grant of provisional anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
Section 482(2)
clean antecedent
liquor seizure
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17397 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-604 Year-2025 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Sunil Yadav Son of Late Jeebu Yadav R/o Village - Mahran Bigha, P.S.-
                 Fatehpur, District - Gaya.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Asha Devi, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   19-03-2026                   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 200 liters of liquor from a hut near the house of the

                   petitioner.

                                 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 even alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner,

                   but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17397 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
                                            2/3




          based on secret information which is the easiest way to

          implicate someone without holding a proper investigation, 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 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 Fatehpur

          P.S. Case No. 604 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17397 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…