Patna High Court
Prahlad YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Prahlad Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case alleging offences under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the seized motorcycles, and that the only evidence against him is a confessional statement of co‑accused Shivam Kumar made while in police custody, which he contended lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, asserting the seriousness of the narcotics and excise allegations. The Court considered the submissions and, noting the amendment to the Excise Act that removed the doctrine of deemed possession, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs 500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. The order further stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed. Consequently, the application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged narcotics and excise offences.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused made in police custody can be relied upon to deny bail.
- Whether the amendment to the Excise Act, 2018, eliminating the concept of deemed possession, affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent influences the continuance of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275, 3(5)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- narcotics offence
- excise offence
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33532 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2026 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani
======================================================
Prahlad Yadav S/O Ram Hirday Yadav R/O Village- Chiknotaba, P.S.-
Ladaniya, District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gagan Deo Yadav
Mr.Rajesh Kumar
Mr.Ravi Prakash
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umanath Mishra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of
the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 115.8 from two motorcycles.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
any of the seized motorcycle and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33532 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
based on confessional statement of Shivam Kumar in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also
submitted that after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Ladaniya P. S. Case No.52 of 2026, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33532 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present 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 shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.