Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Prakash YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Prakash Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, for allegedly possessing 24.660 litres of liquor recovered from a pick‑up vehicle he owned. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, was unaware of the vehicle's misuse by another individual, and had a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, and a deposit of Rs.1,500 with the Patna High Court Advocate Association. The order is subject to Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, and may be revoked if a prior case is discovered. The trial court is directed to confirm the bail if the petitioner’s antecedent remains clean.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • vehicle ownership
  • criminal antecedent
  • CrPC Section 438
  • BNSS Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4392 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2025 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Prakash Yadav Son of Late Triveni Yadav Resident of Village- Ghujadih,
                 Post- Dumri, P.S.- Dumri, District- Giridih, Jharkhand
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Gulnar Begum, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   31-01-2026                  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 Act, 2016.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 24.660 litres of liquor from a pick-up.

                                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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4392 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
                                            2/3




          would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was

          completely unaware that Mohan Kumar would misuse the

          vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended

          from the spot.

                       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 for the petitioner, let 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

          Barachatti P.S. Case No. 291 of 2025, subject to the conditions

          as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if

          it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it

          would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent

          before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4392 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

                     confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a

                     person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                     anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

                                  8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner

                     based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to

                     deposit an amount of Rs.1,500/- with the Advocate Association

                     of the Patna High Court within a period of two weeks from

                     today.


                                                                         (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.