Patna High Court
Yogendra Yadav @ Yogendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Yogendra Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 and several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Sale (B.N.S.) Act. He argued that the liquor seizure from a tractor was not in his possession, he was not the vehicle owner, and the case against him relied on a confessional statement made by another accused in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only two are found, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. Act.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged excise violations and multiple criminal charges?
- Does a confessional statement made by an accused in police custody constitute admissible evidence for framing charges against the petitioner?
- Should the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the confirmation of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Sale (B.N.S.) Act — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 132, 190(2), 190(3), 324(4), 324(5), 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a), 45
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- confessional statement
- excise law
- seizure of liquor
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2) B.N.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43263 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2026 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya
======================================================
Yogendra Yadav @ Yogendra Kumar S/o Late Deo Balak Yadav R/o Vill-
Malsari, Thana- Tekari, District- Gayaji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-07-2026 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 Sections 30(a), 45 of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 and
Sections 190(2), 190(3), 126(2), 132, 127(2), 115(2), 109(1),
324(4) and 324(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 241.500 litres of liquor from a
tractor. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from
the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious
possession and is not the owner of the seized vehicle and he
came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
apprehended accused in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43263 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
2/2
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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Tekari P.S. Case No.85/2026, 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 more than
two cases, 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 has antecedent of two
cases, 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.