Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Awadhesh Kumar @ Awdhesh Yadav @ Awadhesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied as the court was not inclined to grant relief given the petitioner’s unclean criminal antecedent and the facts of the case.

Summary

The petitioner, Awadhesh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case involving the alleged possession of nine litres of illicit liquor, charged under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. The prosecution alleged that the liquor was recovered, though not from the petitioner’s conscious possession. The petitioner claimed innocence and highlighted that the seized liquor was not in his possession, while also noting that he has four pending criminal cases. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the petitioner’s unclean criminal antecedent. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding the circumstances insufficient to justify such relief.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • illicit liquor
  • Section 414 IPC
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21711 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2022 Thana- YADOPUR District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Awadhesh Kumar @ Awdhesh Yadav @ Awadhesh Yadav S/O Hirdya Yadav
                 @ Hirdyanand Yadav R/O Village- Ekderwan, P.S- Nagar Gopalganj, District-
                 Gopalganj.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Yadopur (Jadopur) P.S. Case No. 145 of 2022, dated

                   19.08.2022, lodged under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code

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

                   (Amendment) Act, 2018, pending before the Court of Additional

                   District and Sessions Judge-XIII-cum-Special Judge, Excise

                   Court No. I, Gopalganj.

                                3. As per the prosecution, total recovery of 9 litres of

                   illicit liquor has been made, which is the subject matter of the

                   present case.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21711 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                      2/2




                    petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

                    further submits that nothing has been recovered from the

                    conscious possession of the petitioner. Counsel also submits that

                    the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean, as four

                    criminal cases are pending against him.

                                 5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                    bail of the petitioner and submits that the criminal antecedent of

                    the petitioner is not clean.

                                 6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is

                    not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                    Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is

                    hereby rejected.



                                                                         (Dr. Anshuman, J.)

Aman Kumar/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.