Patna High Court
Subodh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Petitioner Subodh Yadav applied for anticipatory bail after fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, alleging that 103.200 litres of liquor were recovered from two motorcycles not owned by him. He argued that the seizure was not from his conscious possession and that his implication stemmed solely from a confessional statement of another accused, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged seizure and his criminal antecedent.
- Whether the confessional statement of another accused can form a basis for implicating the petitioner.
- Whether the lack of conscious possession of the seized liquor affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2751 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-399 Year-2025 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Subodh Yadav S/O Jata Yadav R/O Village- Narayanpur, P.S- Bairiya, Distt.-
West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sucheta Yadav, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-01-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 103.200 litres of liquor from two
motorcycles.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and
came to be implicated based on the confessional statement of
apprehended accused, namely, Abhishek Kumar in police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2751 of 2026(2) dt.17-01-2026
2/3
custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of
law. It is next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a
case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically
either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person,
confessional statement or secret information without holding a
proper investigation of the case.
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, let 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.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Bairiya
P.S. Case No. 399 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2751 of 2026(2) dt.17-01-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…