Patna High Court
Pankaj Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar Yadav, was implicated in a case alleging the recovery of 407.625 litres of liquor from two vehicles, one of which he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record and was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, claiming he was unaware of the misuse of his vehicle by others. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedents. The order was made subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., and the bail would be confirmed only if the petitioner is found to have a clean record; otherwise, it would be revoked.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under the circumstances?
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence justifies denial of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a), 32
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44472 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-529 Year-2025 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar Yadav Son of Raj Kumar Yadav Resident of Mangrar, P.S. -
Mohanpur, District - Jamui, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akash Raj
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 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 Section, 30(a), 32 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 407.625 litres of liquor from two different vehicles.
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 one 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.44472 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that Manish and Prince would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged, who were also apprehended
from the spot along with four other named accused persons.
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 Jamui P.S. Case No.529/2025, 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.44472 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
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.