Patna High Court
Ranjay @ Ranjay YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail for the petitioner, subject to specified conditions, pending verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjay Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of 85 litres of liquor and 1,000 litres of fermented Jawa Mahua solution. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and the alleged contraband was recovered from a location not belonging to him, with no clear informant named in the FIR. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500, two sureties of the same amount, verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, and a deposit of Rs.1,500 with the Patna High Court Advocate Association, invoking Sections 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and 482(2) of the BNSS. The order conditions that if any antecedent is found, the bail may be revoked, whereas confirmation follows if the petitioner remains clean. The provisional bail is to be confirmed by the trial court upon verification.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions may be imposed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3086 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-661 Year-2025 Thana- HISUWA District- Nawada
======================================================
Ranjay @ Ranjay Yadav S/o Mundrika Yadav Resident of Village- Alam
Bigha, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya,
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Man Mohan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 85 litres of liquor along with 1000 litres of
Fermented Jawa Mahua Solution from a bush near the bank of a
river.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner.
It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3086 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
the instance of the local person but then the name of the person
who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the
FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution,
when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
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.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 Hisua
P.S. Case No. 661 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 even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3086 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to
deposit an amount of Rs.1,500/- with the Advocate Association
of the Patna High Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…