Pramod Yadav @ Prmod YadavversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19236 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2026 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Pramod Yadav @ Prmod Yadav S/o Late Wakil Yadav @ Let Vakil Yadav R/o
                 Village - Mansha Dube, Dube, Patkhauli (Patkhauliya), Ward no. 02, Police
                 Station - Bairiya, District - West Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Brij Kishor Mishra
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   26-03-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his

                   arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act

                   and allegation is of recovery of 6.8 litres of liquor from a

                   motorcycle.

                                4. 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 he came to be

                   implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19236 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
                                            2/3




          motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would

          use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would

          create evidence against himself and hence, would get

          implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely

          unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner

          as alleged who also fled from the spot and he came to be

          implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an

          inimical term.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail

          application.

                       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 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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) 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 Bairiya P. S. Case No.69 of 2026, subject to the

          conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                       7. The application stands allowed.

                       8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19236 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
                                                           3/3




                         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 more than four cases,

                         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 has antecedent of four cases only, in that event,

                         the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed

                         forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T