Patna High Court
Indal Kumar Yadav @ Indal yadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent cases.
Summary
Indal Kumar Yadav applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he may be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly recovering 4.5 litres of liquor near Majhari Crossing. The petitioner argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the location was public, and the FIR was based on undisclosed secret information, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. It directed that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022?
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a public place and lack of conscious possession justify anticipatory bail?
- How should the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the confirmation of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21206 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-196 Year-2025 Thana- NIRMALI District- Supaul
======================================================
Indal Kumar Yadav @ Indal Yadav S/O Ramawatar Yadav R/O Village-
Mahua, Ward No. 2, PS- Nirmali, Distt-Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pratibha Srivastava, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 4.5 litres of liquor from a bag near
Majhari Crossing.
4. 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 the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
but then is accessible to public at large. It is further submitted
that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21206 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name
of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner was
not implicated based on the secret information. It is next
submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the
instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement
or secret information without holding a proper investigation of
the case.
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, let the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Nirmali P.S. Case No. 196 of 2025,
S.T. Ex. 3894 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21206 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two
cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…