Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nawal Kishor Yadav @ Gabbar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court held that bail may be granted notwithstanding the seriousness of the charges and the petitioner’s antecedents, provided strict conditions are imposed.

Summary

The petitioner, Nawal Kishor Yadav, was arrested in connection with a case of deaths caused by consumption of poisonous liquor, charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act. He claimed false implication and argued that the allegations were general and the informant was not an eye‑witness. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s five prior criminal antecedents. The court considered the length of custody since September 2025 and the nature of the charges. It decided to grant bail, subject to a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and specific conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, non‑intimidation of witnesses, and not committing similar offences. The trial court was directed to cancel the bail if any condition is violated.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the grave nature of the offences under the IPC and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents and the period of custody preclude the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • poisonous liquor
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • criminal procedure
  • court conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2358 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-465 Year-2023 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
                                                       Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Nawal Kishor Yadav @ Gabbar Yadav S/o Birendra Yadav @ Birendra Ray
                 Resident of village - Karamwa Jaishinghpur, P.S.- Turkauliya, Distt.- East
                 Champaran
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
                                                  Ms.Harsha Shashwat, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Veena Kumari Jaiswal, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Turkauliya (Raghunathpur) P.S. Case No. 465 of 2023,

                   instituted for the offences under Sections 304, 328, 201/34 of

                   the Indian Penal Code and u/s 33, 34, 37 and 41 of the Bihar

                   Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.

                                3. Prosecution case, in short, is that several persons

                   died due to consumption of poisonous liquor.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

                   Learned counsel further submitted that in course of investigation

                   the name of the petitioner surfaced in this case stating that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2358 of 2026(3) dt.10-03-2026
                                             2/3




          petitioner has distributed the alleged liquor in the area. He

          further submitted that after investigation the I.O of this case has

          submitted Charge-sheet u/s 302, 307, 120(B) of the I.P.C. and

          33,34,37 and 41 and Section 32 of the Bihar Prohibition and

          Excise Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          general and omnibus allegation has been made against the

          petitioner. The informant is not the eye-witness of the

          occurrence. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

          the petitioner is in custody since 18.09.2025 and has five

          criminal antecedents.

                        5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                        6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, as also the period of custody undergone by the

          petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                        7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing

          of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of

          the    like     amount      each      to    the     satisfaction   of   Court

          below/concerned          Court      in     connection     with     Turkauliya

          (Raghunathpur) P.S. Case No. 465 of 2023, subject to the

          following conditions:
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2358 of 2026(3) dt.10-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                                   (I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or

                     close member.

                                   (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date

                     fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two

                     consecutive dates without sufficient cause.

                                   (III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the

                     prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during

                     the course of trial.

                                   (IV) The Petitioner shall not commit offence of a

                     similar nature in future.

                                   (V) The Petitioner shall not leave the territorial

                     jurisdiction of the learned court below without prior permission

                     of the court concerned.

                                   In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,

                     the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the

                     petitioner.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.