Patna High Court
Narsingh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Narsingh Yadav, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for the alleged recovery of 209.535 litres of liquor from a truck he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that others had misused his vehicle. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, considering the petitioner's clean antecedent and lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a modest bail bond and two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal record by the trial court. The order also stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41603 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2026 Thana- SUKHANI District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Narsingh Yadav S/o Ram Narayan Yadav R/o Jafarpur, Ward No. 15, P.S.-
Kusheshwarsthan, Distt- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar
======================================================
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.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 209.535 litres of liquor from a truck. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he
came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the
seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus
would create evidence against himself and hence would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41603 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that Shyam and Prem would misuse his
vehicle in the manner as alleged who were also apprehended
from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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.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 Sukhani P.S. Case No.36/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41603 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.