Patna High Court
Ajay YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that, subject to verification of the petitioner’s clean antecedent, provisional anticipatory bail may be granted under Section 438 CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of 85 litres of liquor from two motorcycles. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and was implicated merely because he owned one of the seized motorcycles, which his friend allegedly misused. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner could be involved in the offence. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC should be granted in the present case
- Whether ownership of the vehicle implicates the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
- Whether the petitioner is likely to abscond or tamper with evidence
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45942 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2021 Thana- PARAIYA District- Gaya
======================================================
Ajay Yadav S/O Mahadev Yadav R/O village - Navadih Nagwan, P.S -
Imamganj, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinod Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rana Randhir Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-07-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 85 litres of liquor from two motorcycles.
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 he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of one of the
seized motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person
would use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45942 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
2/3
would create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner
as alleged who also fled from the spot.
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.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
Paraiya P. S. Case No.111 of 2021, 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
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45942 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
3/3
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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.