Patna High Court

Ramashish YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 5 May 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

Ramashish Yadav, the owner of a motorcycle from which 32.250 litres of liquor was seized, feared arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act. He argued that he was not present at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that a friend misused his vehicle. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order was made subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the bail to be confirmed only if he has at most one prior case, and to be revoked if more than one antecedent is found.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bihar Excise Act for alleged possession of illicit liquor.
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner.
Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
seizure of liquor
vehicle ownership
criminal antecedent
Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29824 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1012 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Ramashish Yadav S/o Prem Yadav R/o Village - Badildih, P.S - Garhi, District
                 - Jamui

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr.Niranjan Parihar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Ms.Gulnar Begum
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   05-05-2026               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 Sections 30(a) and

                   32(3)of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 32.250 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.

                             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

                   his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29824 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as

          alleged, who also fled 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. 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 JAM P.S. Case No.

          1012 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 more than

          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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29824 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
                                                          3/3




                        petitioner has antecedent of one case in that event the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…