Patna High Court
Jitendra Kumar @ Kallu 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 antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitendra Kumar (Kallu Yadav), sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, for allegedly transporting 650 ml of liquor in his vehicle. He argued that the liquor was recovered from the vehicle, not from his personal possession, and that he was unaware that Nand Kishore, who was apprehended at the spot, would misuse the vehicle. The petitioner disclosed three prior criminal cases and contended that ownership of the vehicle alone should not render him culpable. The State opposed the bail. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedents, stating that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence suffices to justify arrest without possession of the contraband.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(A)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24686 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-734 Year-2023 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar @ Kallu Yadav S/o Dadu Yadav Resident of Mohalla- Gewal
Bigha Bathan, Police Line Road, Gayaji, P.S.- Rampur, District- Gayaji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 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 Section 30(A) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases and allegation is of
recovery of 650 ml of liquor from a car. 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 implicated.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24686 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
It is also submitted that the petitioner was completely unaware
that Nand Kishore would misuse his vehicle in the manner as
alleged who was also apprehended 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.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen 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 Sherghati (Dhobi) P.S. Case No.734/2023,
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 more than
three cases, 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 has antecedent of three
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24686 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…