Patna High Court
Chhote Yadav @ Miyan Ji @ Niranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application for the arrested petitioner and granted provisional anticipatory bail to the other petitioner subject to verification of his antecedent under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, Chhote Yadav and Kakku Yadav, filed an anticipatory bail application in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act. During the pendency, Kakku Yadav was arrested, and his counsel sought to withdraw his part of the application, which the Court permitted, dismissing the petition with respect to him. The remaining petitioner, Chhote Yadav, argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the alleged liquor, and that the FIR lacked the informant’s name, seeking anticipatory bail. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to Chhote Yadav under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedent, clarifying that any undisclosed prior case would vitiate the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail application can be withdrawn for a petitioner who was arrested during its pendency
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
- What conditions must be satisfied for confirmation of provisional anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- withdrawal of bail application
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 438 CrPC
- provisional bail
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18187 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2023 Thana- KHUSRUPUR District- Patna
======================================================
1. Chhote Yadav @ Miyan Ji @ Niranjan Kumar S/O Late Ramdev Singh R/O
Village- Ahiyatpur, P.S.- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda
2. Kakku Yadav @ Vinay Bhushan Prasad S/O Late Ramdev Singh R/O
Village- Ahiyatpur, P.S.- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks
permission to withdraw the present anticipatory bail application
with respect to petitioner no.2, namely, Kakku Yadav @ Vinay
Bhushan Prasad, who during pendency of the anticipatory bail
application was arrested.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, instant petition is dismissed as
withdrawn with respect to petitioner no.2, namely, Kakku Yadav
@ Vinay Bhushan Prasad.
5. The petitioner no.1 seeks bail in anticipation of his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18187 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a gunny bag allegedly
thrown by the accused persons along with 1200 kg. soaked jawa
mahua was destroyed.
7. The 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 alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and petitioner has no concern with the alleged gunny bag and he
came to be implicated at the instance of local person, but the
name of the person, who disclosed the name of the petitioner is
not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case
of the prosecution, when petitioner has not been implicated
based on secret information and is a person with clean
antecedent.
8. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
9. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner no.1, above-named, in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18187 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court
below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Khushrupur P. S. Case No.57 of 2023, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
10. The application stands allowed.
11. It is made clear that the learned trial Court
after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…