Patna High Court
Kamlesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents, and conditioned confirmation of the bail on a clean criminal record.
Summary
Kamlesh Yadav, the owner of a motorcycle from which 26 litres of liquor was seized, applied for anticipatory bail, claiming he had no knowledge of the liquor being in his vehicle and that his friend had misused the vehicle. The petitioner asserted a clean criminal record and argued that ownership alone should not implicate him. The State opposed the bail, contending the offence under Sections 30(a) and 32 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018. The High Court, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond and two sureties, and ordered verification of the petitioner’s antecedents. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the CrPC in a case of alleged possession of liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle from which liquor was recovered is sufficient grounds for arrest and denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- Bihar Prohibition Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22878 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-790 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Kamlesh Yadav S/O Sahdew Yadav @ Sahadev Chaudhari R/O Vill- Nimuia,
P.s - Kateya, Dist- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Priya Raj
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 offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 32 of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 26 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he
came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the
seized vehicle. 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 would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22878 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that his friend would misuse his vehicle in
the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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 Excise P.S. Case No.790/2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22878 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…