Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Amarjeet Yadav @ Amarjit YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
WITHDRAWN

Holding

The second anticipatory bail application was dismissed as withdrawn upon the petitioner’s request.

Summary

The petitioner, Amarjeet Yadav, feared arrest in a case under Section 281 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. He had earlier obtained anticipatory bail in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 16396 of 2026, but the trial court found he had concealed an additional criminal antecedent, leading to the non‑confirmation of his bail bonds. Consequently, he filed a second anticipatory bail application. During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel sought permission to withdraw this second application, acknowledging the difficulty arising from the concealment. The court granted permission to withdraw, and the second anticipatory bail application was dismissed as withdrawn.

Issues considered

  • The court considered whether the second anticipatory bail application could be withdrawn by the petitioner.
  • The effect of concealment of criminal antecedent on the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • concealment of antecedent
  • withdrawal of application
  • criminal procedure
  • bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29877 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2026 Thana- KUSHESHWARASTHAN District-
                                                        Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Amarjeet Yadav @ Amarjit Yadav S/o Suryanarayan Yadav R/o Village -
                 Ghordaur, P.S.- Kusheshwar Asthan, District - Darbhanga

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Virendra Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   04-05-2026                  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 Section 281 of the

                   BNS, 2023 read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner had earlier moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail

                   by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No. 16396 of 2026 and the

                   same was allowed by an order dated 17.03.2026 and the

                   petitioner was directed to be released on provisional anticipatory

                   bail and the learned Trial Court was thereafter directed to verify

                   the criminal antecedent of the petitioner.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29877 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
                                                        2/2




                      Criminal Miscellaneous No. 16396 of 2026 the petitioner at

                      Para-3 had pleaded that he has antecedent of one case, but then

                      he had antecedent of two cases, as such on verification it was

                      found that petitioner had concealed his criminal antecedent in

                      Criminal Miscellaneous No. 16396 of 2026, as such, his

                      anticipatory bail bonds were not confirmed, hence the instant

                      second anticipatory bail application has been filed.

                                   5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, after some

                      arguments realizing his difficulty, seeks permission to withdraw

                      the second anticipatory bail application.

                                   6. Permission is accorded.

                                   7. Accordingly, the instant second anticipatory bail

                      application stands dismissed as withdrawn.



                                                        (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.