Patna High Court
Nirmal Yadav @ Nirmal Rai @ Nirmal RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and verification conditions, finding no direct incriminating evidence against him.
Summary
The petitioner, Nirmal Yadav, was implicated in a case involving the seizure of 120 litres of illicit country-made liquor from a motorcycle seized during a police check. The co-accused, Satvir (also known as Ankit Kumar), identified the petitioner in his statement, although no incriminating material was found on the petitioner and he was not present at the scene. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing innocence and lack of possession, while the State opposed, citing his six prior similar offences and labeling him a habitual offender. The court examined the evidence, noting the absence of any material linking the petitioner to the seized liquor, and considered the co-accused’s testimony insufficient for denial of bail. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Substances Act, including verification of his criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the co-accused’s identification and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Substances Act — s. 317(5), 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal liquor
- co-accused testimony
- criminal antecedents
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bihar Negotiable Substances Act
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37147 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2026 Thana- Geedha District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Nirmal Yadav @ Nirmal Rai @ Nirmal Ray S/O Bhutan Yadav @ Bhulan
Yadav Resident of Village-Pachaina, P.S. - Geedha, District Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raju Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 15-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Geedha P.S. Case No. 51 of 2026 for allegedly having
committed offence under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act and Section and 317(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story which has been lodged
on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant to
the effect that he received information that one person will be
coming with illegal country-made liquor. The informant along
with the police party reached at the place and started vehicle
checking drive. During course of vehicle checking drive, one
person, namely, Satvir @ Ankit Kumar was apprehended
and he disclosed the name of the petitioner and other persons.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37147 of 2026(2) dt.15-06-2026
2/3
Upon search of the bike, which Satvir @ Ankit Kumar was
riding, total 120 litres of illicit country-made liquor was
recovered and seizure list was prepared accordingly.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence,
rather his name has transpired in the present case on the
disclosure made by the co-accused person, Satvir @ Ankit
Kumar. The petitioner has got no concern with the alleged
motorcycle or seized liquor. The petitioner was not even present
at the place of occurrence and on the disclosure made by the co-
accused, he has been accused in the present case. He further
submits that the petitioner has got six criminal antecedents of
similar nature, in which he is on bail.
5. The learned APP for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the
petitioner is a habitual offender and if he will be granted the
privilege of anticipatory bail, he will again indulge in the same
offence.
6. Having heard the rival submissions and after going
through the record, it appears that the petitioner was not present
at the place of occurrence. 120 litres of illegal country- made
liquor was seized from the bike and one person namely, Satvir
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37147 of 2026(2) dt.15-06-2026
3/3
@ Ankir Kumar was arrested at the place of occurrence. On the
disclosure made by the co-accused, Satvir @ Ankit Kumar, the
name of the petitioner transpired in the present case and nothing
incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the
petitioner. Considering the above, let the petitioner, above
named, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge
Excise Court No.-II, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Geedha
P.S. Case No. 51 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with further condition:
(1) The learned Court concerned shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it
is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedents, the court concerned shall take steps for cancellation
of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail
bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be
delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.