Patna High Court
JITENDRA YADAVversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitendra Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a), 38(1) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, relating to the alleged recovery of 4,462.905 litres of liquor from a truck. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the vehicle, and was implicated solely on secret information without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail, citing his criminal antecedent of five prior cases, four of which were also excise matters. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent; if more than five cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed, otherwise it would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 and his criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- secret information
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22424 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-491 Year-2025 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
======================================================
JITENDRA YADAV S/o Mahavir Yadav Resident of Village- Ramnagar
(Kalkapur), Ward No.09, Police Station- Ghodhardiha, District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pronoti Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a),
38(1) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of five cases out of which four cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
4462.905 litres of liquor from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated based on the secret information which is the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22424 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
easiest way to implicate someone. 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.
It is also submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier also
came to be implicated in cases relating to excise.
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.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty-five 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
Phulparas P.S. Case No. 491 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
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22424 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five
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 five cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…