Patna High Court
Raj Lal YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
Petitioner Raj Lal Yadav, owner of a vehicle from which 225 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under IPC Sections 272, 273 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not present at the spot of seizure, and that his driver, who fled, misused the vehicle without his knowledge. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the petitioner furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and subject to verification of his criminal antecedents by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving alleged possession of illicit liquor.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence makes the owner liable.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- IPC 272
- IPC 273
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28100 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2020 Thana- BENIPATTI District- Madhubani
======================================================
Raj Lal Yadav Son of Ram Prakash Yadav Resident of Village - Lal Sahpur
Chhaka, P.S.- Babby, District - Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Rina Sinha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2026 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 Sections 272, 273
IPC and 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 225 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 create evidence against himself and hence would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28100 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
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 Benipatti P.S. Case No.261/2020, 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
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28100 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…