Patna High Court
Mukesh Yadav @ Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- 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, Mukesh Yadav, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 40 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not caught in possession, does not own the seized vehicle, and the only basis for the charge is a confessional statement made by Tejnarayan while in police custody, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner surrenders within six weeks, furnishes a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties, and that the trial court verifies his antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Excise Act offences.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody can form a basis for arrest and denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession of the seized liquor and vehicle affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- seizure of liquor
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41514 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2021 Thana- SIKARHATTA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Mukesh Yadav @ Mukesh Kumar Son of Ram Awadh Singh Resident of
Village- Baradhara, P.S.- Ayar, District- Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 40 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized vehicle he came to be implicated based on confessional
statement of Tejnarayan in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41514 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/2
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 Sikarhatta P.S. Case
No. 137 of 2021 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 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.