Patna High Court

Sikandra Yadav @ Sikendar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 2 June 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied as the court was not inclined to grant bail in the present facts and circumstances.

Summary

The petitioner, Sikandra Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after the police recovered 1,800 litres of Nepali liquor and 19 litres of beer from a Scorpio vehicle in connection with a case under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. The prosecution alleged that the seized liquor was linked to the petitioner, while his counsel argued that the vehicle did not belong to him, he was not the driver, and the recovery was based merely on a local watchman's suspicion. The petitioner also highlighted his claim of innocence despite having nine pending criminal cases, six of which relate to the Excise Act. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. After considering the facts, the court concluded that the circumstances did not warrant granting anticipatory bail and therefore rejected the petitioner's bail application.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged possession of illicit liquor
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 274, 275, 3(5)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
possession of illicit liquor
criminal antecedent
bail denial

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36119 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2026 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Sikandra Yadav @ Sikendar Yadav Son of Kishundev Yadav Resident of
                 Village- Bishanpur, P.S.- Ladaniya, District- Madhubani
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-06-2026                  The Court proceeding is being conducted through

                   virtual mode.

                                2. Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and

                   Learned APP for the State.

                                3. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Ladaniya P.S. Case No.20 of 2026 lodged on 13.01.2026,

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of

                   the BNS, 2023 read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition

                   and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 pending before the Court of

                   Exclusive Special Judge Excise, Madhubani.

                                4. As per the prosecution, the total recovery of 1800

                   litres of Nepali liquor and 19 liter beer have been made from a

                   Scorpio vehicle, which is the subject matter of the present case.

                                5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36119 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026
                                                       2/2




                     also submits that the said recovery has not been made from

                     conscious possession of the petitioner and his name has been

                     transpired only on suspicion of local Chowkidar. Counsel

                     further submits that criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not

                     clean as there are nine criminal cases pending against him in

                     which 6 cases are relating to Excise Act.

                                  6. Counsel further submits that the alleged vehicle

                     from where the recovery has been made, does not belongs to

                     petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is not a driver

                     of the said vehicle.

                                  7. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                     bail of the petitioner and submits that criminal antecedent of the

                     petitioner is not clean as there are nine criminal cases pending

                     against him in which 6 cases are relating to Excise Act and this

                     aspect must be taken into consideration.

                                  8. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is

                     not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the

                     prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.



                                                             (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Prakashmani/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.