Patna High Court

Suran Yadav @ Surendra Yadav @ Bauka @ Suren YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 27 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Suran Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 18 litres of liquor from a public bush. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the location did not belong to him, and the complaint was filed by a hostile chowkidar who had not reported the matter earlier. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will be cancelled; if only one prior case, the bail will be confirmed. The order is made under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Sale (BNSS) Act.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the circumstances of alleged recovery and the complainant’s hostility justify granting bail.
Whether the court can impose conditions pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
public place
criminal antecedent
bail conditions
Section 482(2)

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22783 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-392 Year-2025 Thana- PALASI District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Suran Yadav @ Surendra Yadav @ Bauka @ Suren Yadav S/o Anandi Yadav
                 @ Andulal Yadav R/o Village- Dhapri, Ward No.01, P.S- Palasi, Dist- Araria,
                 State- Bihar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Madhav Jha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Nand Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 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 Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 18 liters of liquor from a bush.

                                4. Learned      counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing

                   was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22783 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
                                            2/3




          at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical

          term. It is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the

          involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did

          not inform the police prior to 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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his 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.

          5000/- (Rupees 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 Palasi

          P.S. Case No. 392 of 2025 subject to the conditions as 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 petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one

          case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22783 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has

                      antecedent of one case only, in that event the provisional

                      anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                        (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…