Patna High Court
Santu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Santu Yadav, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 75 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He was not caught in possession of the liquor and claimed he was unaware that his friend misused the vehicle. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that ownership of the vehicle alone should not constitute evidence against him. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. The order stipulated that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
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 constitutes sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments/Criminal Procedure Code (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34785 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2026 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Santu Yadav Son of Suryadayal Yadav Resident of Village -Mahadeva PS-
Obra District -Aurangabad Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Rupa Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-06-2026 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
petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 75
liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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.34785 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is also 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.
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
Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 162 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 more
than three cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for
the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34785 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of three
cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.