Patna High Court

Saheb Kumar Yadav @ Saheb Kumar VermaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 21 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

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

Summary

The petitioner, Saheb Kumar Yadav, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 15.750 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, had no knowledge of its misuse, and possessed a clean criminal record. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner's antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed upon verification. The decision hinged on the principles of anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS and the lack of direct involvement of the petitioner.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner without proof of possession

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Section 30
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25196 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1090 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Saheb Kumar Yadav @ Saheb Kumar Verma Son of Ramsaran Prasad Yadav
                 Resident of Village- Laxmi Bigha, P.S.- and District- Nawada

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   21-04-2026                  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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 15.750 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.

                                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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25196 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that

          Shiv would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who

          was 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 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.

          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 Nawada

          Excise P.S. Case No. 1090 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 even 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

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25196 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      person with clean antecedent 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…