Patna High Court
Jaihind Yadav @ Jay Hind YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as the petitioners have no criminal antecedent and no possession of the seized liquor, following the precedent of Ram Vinay Yadav.
Summary
The petitioners, Jaihind Yadav and Birendra Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, where 70 litres of illicit liquor was seized and Naresh Chaudhary named them. They contended that no liquor was found in their possession and they had no prior criminal record. The State opposed, relying on the naming by the arrested individual. The court, referring to the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar (2019) which allows anticipatory bail despite the bar under Section 76(2) if no offence is established, found the petitioners’ claims credible. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with specific conditions and warned of revocation if criminal antecedent is later discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioners can be said to have committed an offence given no seizure from their conscious possession and no prior criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 76(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 76
- criminal antecedent
- seizure of liquor
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35433 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2026 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Jaihind Yadav @ Jay Hind Yadav Son of Birjan Yadav R/O Village -
Chaumukha, Police Station - Yogapatti, District - West Champaran.
2. Birendra Yadav Son of Madhu Yadav R/O village-Chaumukha, Police
Station-Yogapatti, District-West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sachida Nand Rai, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 21-05-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 127 of 2026 for the
offence under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on secret information, the accused were intercepted. One
managed to escape while Naresh Chaudhary was taken into
custody and there is recovery/seizure of 70 liters of country
made liquor. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
nothing has been recovered from their conscious possession nor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35433 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
2/4
they have criminal antecedent and only because the arrested
person named them, implicated.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioners relied on
the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon’ble Patna High Court in
the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in
2019 (2) PLJR 1089 wherein it has been held that an
application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar
Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar
under Section 76(2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation
made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made
out.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that
Naresh Chaudhary has named them.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that they have no criminal antecedent nor anything has been
recovered from their conscious possession, in that background,
this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of
anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. If, however, it is found that contrary to the
statement made in paragraph-3, the petitioners have criminal
antecedent, the present order shall become infructuous.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35433 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
3/4
9. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event
of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of concerned Court in connection with Yogapatti
P.S. Case No. 127 of 2026 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioners shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight for six months to mark their
attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be
taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35433 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
4/4
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.