Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Vikash Kumar Yadav @ Vikash YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.

Summary

Vikash Kumar Yadav applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of 216 litres of liquor from two motorcycles. He contended that he was not arrested on the spot, had no ownership of the seized vehicles, and was not named in the FIR, arguing that the case was based on secret information without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If more than one antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one antecedent is found, the bail will be confirmed.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the alleged offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
  • Whether the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent warrants denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • excise offence
  • Section 30
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • criminal antecedent
  • bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40534 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2026 Thana- GUTHANI District- Siwan
                 ======================================================
                 Vikash Kumar Yadav @ Vikash Yadav S/O Amarnath Yadav R/O Village-
                 Bahelia, P.S.- Mairwa, Distt.- Siwan (Bihar).
                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Majid Mahboob Khan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-06-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 216 litres of liquor from two

                   motorcycles.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted

                   that petitioner is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and

                   came to be implicated at the instance of the local person but

                   then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40534 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion

          on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner has not been

          implicated based on the secret information. It is next submitted

          that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the

          police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the

          Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation of the case.

                       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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,

          above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a

          period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional

          anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees

          Five Thousand) 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 Guthani P.S. Case

          No. 60 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under

          Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned

          Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner

          and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40534 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
                                                       3/3




                     case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his

                     antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail

                     application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                     shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that

                     petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.