Patna High Court

Santu YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Santu Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 200 litres of liquor and 5,000 litres of jawa mahua from a public area. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, the alleged contraband was not found in his possession, and the informant’s identity was omitted from the FIR, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. It further held that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be presumed obtained by concealment and would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, pending verification by the trial court.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances described
Whether the alleged facts and lack of possession justify granting bail
Whether the trial court should verify the petitioner’s antecedent before confirming bail

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
clean antecedent
provisional bail
Section 482
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.357 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-390 Year-2025 Thana- OBRA District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Santu Yadav S/o- Suryadayal Yadav Village- Mahadewa PS- Obra District-
                 Aurangabad Bihar

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Ms.Rupa Kumari
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Madan Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-01-2026               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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and

                   30(c) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 200 litres of liquor along with 5000 litres of jawa

                   mahua from a place near Diyara Area.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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

                   and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.357 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                            2/3




          at the instance of local people, 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.

                   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 Obra P.S.

          Case No. 390 of 2025, 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 even

          one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the

          purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his

          antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional

          anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.357 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        verification if 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)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…