Patna High Court
Sanjay Yadav @ Prince Prakash @ Sanjay Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 2.160 litres of liquor from a scooty. He argued that he was not the owner of the scooty, nothing was recovered from his possession, and the case was based on a confessional statement made by Sunny in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. 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 antecedents within six weeks. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody has evidentiary value for granting bail.
- Whether ownership of the seized scooty is relevant to the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the trial court can condition anticipatory bail on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- confessional statement
- ownership of seized vehicle
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44163 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2026 Thana- Benta District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Sanjay Yadav @ Prince Prakash @ Sanjay Kumar Yadav S/o Baidyanath
Yadav @ Baidhnath Yadav R/o Village - Shahaganj Benta, P.S - Benta,
District - Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Adv
Mr. Vinod Kumar, Adv
Mr. Rohit Kant Singh, Adv
Mr.Ravi Prakash
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Abhay Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-07-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 2.160 litres of liquor from a Scooty.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized scooty and he came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44163 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/3
confessional statement of Sunny 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.
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.
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 Benta
P.S. Case No. 102 of 2026, 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 more
than 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 has antecedent of one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44163 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/3
case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.