Patna High Court
Ajay Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Kumar Yadav, was implicated in a case involving the seizure of 168.48 litres of liquor from a car and a motorcycle registered in his name, under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, had a clean antecedent, and was unaware that another person, Shankar Kumar, would misuse his vehicle. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, ordered provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. It further directed that if the petitioner is found to have any prior case, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order 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 the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged seizure of liquor.
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle and alleged lack of conscious possession justify granting bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, if any, should affect the confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22756 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2025 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Ajay Kumar Yadav S/O Tileshar Yadav @ Teelesar Yadav R/O Vill.-
Yodhabigha, P.S.- Barachatti, Dist.- Gaya ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 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) and
41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 168.48 litres of liquor from a car and a motorcycle.
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 came to be implicated based on the fact that he is
owner of the seized car. It is next submitted that no prudent
person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence
and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22756 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Shankar Kumar would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot.
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.500/- (Rupees
Five Hundred) 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 Barachatti P.S.
Case No. 332 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
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22756 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…