Anil Kumar Yadav @ Anil KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45178 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2026 Thana- HASANPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Anil Kumar Yadav @ Anil Kumar S/O Late Bashudeo Yadav @ Baso Yadav
                 R/O Village- Patahi, P.S.- Chhaurahi, Distt.- Begusarai.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Sarbottam Kumar Sarkar
                                                  Mr.Savika Kumari
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Khurshid Anwar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-07-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his

                   arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

                                 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act

                   and allegation is of recovery of 221.625 litres of liquor from a

                   place near a garden.

                                 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged

                   recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45178 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
                                            2/3




          based on secret information which is the easiest way to

          implicate someone. It is next submitted that police in majority

          of cases implicating innocent persons either at the behest of

          Chaukidar, local person, secret information and confessional

          statement in a mechanical manner without holding a proper

          investigation.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail

          application.

                       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 Court below

          within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the

          sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 Hasanpur P. S. Case No.135 of 2026, subject to

          the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                       7. The application stands allowed.

                       8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after

          accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify

          the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45178 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
                                                           3/3




                         found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five cases,

                         then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of

                         obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before

                         this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail

                         order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found

                         that petitioner has antecedent of five cases only, in that event,

                         the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed

                         forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T