Patna High Court
Ankit Kumar Yadav @ Ankit YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the conditions imposed.
Summary
The petitioner, Ankit Kumar Yadav, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 172.8 litres of liquor from a truck, although the liquor was not found in his possession and he claims he was unaware that his vehicle was used by another person, Mukesh. The petitioner, who has a clean antecedent, sought anticipatory bail, arguing that ownership of the vehicle alone should not make him liable. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnishes a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedent. 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 BNSS.
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 makes the owner liable for the offence.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28216 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2026 Thana- EXCISE JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Ankit Kumar Yadav @ Ankit Yadav Son of Jagnarayan Yadav Permanent
resident of Village - Badka Dhakaich (Dhakaich), P.S.- Krishnabrahma,
District - Buxar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amarendra Nath Verma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nat
======================================================
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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 172.8 litres of liquor from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28216 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated
and at the same time shall bring disrepute to his business, it is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Mukesh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged, who
was also 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 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 Excise Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 18 of 2026
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28216 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…