Patna High Court

Lalu YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 23 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Summary

The petitioner, Lalu Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly recovering 39 litres of liquor from his auto-rickshaw. He argued that he had a clean record, the liquor was not found in his possession, and he was unaware of his driver’s alleged misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents by the trial court. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Issues considered

What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act?
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence can alone constitute sufficient grounds for arrest and denial of bail.
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct possession of the liquor justify provisional anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30(a)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
vehicle ownership
criminal antecedent
provisional bail
Section 482(2)

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27137 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2026 Thana- AMDABAD District- Katihar
                 ======================================================
                 Lalu Yadav S/O Futesh Yadav Resident of Village- Birbanna Nagarpara,
                 Dakshin chakrami, (Nathnagar) P.S.- Bhawanipur (Narayanpur) District-
                 Bhagalpur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Kunwar Ajit Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Khurshid Anwar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-04-2026                  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 Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 39 litres of liquor from an auto. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27137 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated.

          It is also submitted that the petitioner was completely unaware

          that his driver 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 Amdabad P.S. Case No.16/2026, 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
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27137 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                       shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…