Patna High Court
Jitu Kumar Yadav @ Jitu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitu Kumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018, where 80 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from his dalan. He argued that the dalan is a public area, he was not caught in possession, and the complaint was motivated by an antagonistic watchman. The State opposed the bail. The Court considered the petitioner’s three prior criminal cases, two under the Excise Act, and applied the provisions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent. If more than three prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only three, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
- liquor seizure
- public premises
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22113 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2024 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Jitu Kumar Yadav @ Jitu Kumar S/o Ganesh Rai R/o Village- Dhudhuan, P.S-
Ara Muffasil, Dist- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramashray Roy, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 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 Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 80
litres of liquor from the Dalan of the petitioner.
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 the Dalan is a
place outside the house and thus is accessible to villagers at
large. It is further submitted that no prudent person would use
his own Dalan for committing an occurrence and, thus, would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and, hence, would get
implicated. It is next submitted that petitioner came to be
implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom he is on
an inimical term. It is also submitted that if the Chawkidar was
aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence
then why he did not inform the police prior to the institution of
the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution.
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 appearing on behalf of 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.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen 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 Ara Mufassil P.S.
Case No. 264 of 2024, 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
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22113 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
three 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 three cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…