Patna High Court
Santosh Yadav @ Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Santosh Yadav and Bipin Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several IPC offences (sections 341, 323, 385, 504, 506, 272, 273) and the Bihar Excise Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners, while intoxicated, arrived in a Scorpio vehicle, demanded Rs 5,000 as extortion, threatened the complainant and fled when villagers intervened, also seizing a litre of liquor. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, had no possession of the vehicle or liquor, and that the extortion charge was fabricated. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 5,000 with two sureties each, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioners’ criminal antecedents; if the antecedents exceed the stipulated limits, the bail would not be confirmed. The order is conditional and remains provisional pending verification.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in the present case
- Whether the petitioners’ alleged criminal antecedents justify denial of bail
- Whether the allegations of extortion and possession of liquor are sufficient to deny bail
- Whether Section 482(2) of the BNSS permits the provisional bail order
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 323, 341, 385, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- extortion
- false implication
- criminal antecedent
- IPC
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.219 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-333 Year-2018 Thana- JHAJHA District- Jamui
======================================================
1. Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar Son of Sabhan Yadav @ Sohan Yadav R/o
Village - Shoyana, P.S. - Jhajha, Dist. - Jamui.
2. Bipin Yadav @ Bipin Kumar Son of Devendra Yadav R/o Village - Shoyana,
P.S. - Jhajha, Dist. - Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanju Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323,
385, 504, 506, 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code read with
Sections 30(a)(b) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case and petitioner no. 2 is
a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that Tej
Narayan Yadav and other accused persons including the
petitioners arrived at his residence in a Scorpio vehicle in an
intoxicated condition and demanded Rs. 5,000/- by way of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.219 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
extortion and when he refused to pay, they threatened to kill
him, further when villagers intervened, the accused persons fled
away leaving the vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that petitioners were not
arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from
their conscious possession and are not the owner of the seized
vehicle, as such, the alleged recovery of one liter of liquor from
the Scorpio vehicle does not belong to the petitioners. It is also
submitted that allegation of extortion is false and fabricated.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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.
5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each 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
Jhajha P.S. Case No. 333 of 2018 subject to the conditions as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.219 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
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 petitioners and
in the event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
more than one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of even
one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
one case only and petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean
antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…