Patna High Court
Rohit Kumar Yadav @ Rohit YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Rohit Kumar Yadav, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of large quantities of liquor. He applied for anticipatory bail, asserting a clean criminal record and that the alleged liquor was recovered from a public area, not from his possession. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a modest bail bond and two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent within six weeks. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The decision hinged on the application of Section 482(2) of the BNSS and principles governing anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act?
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and clean antecedent justify provisional anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable Sale and Settlement Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46344 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-242 Year-2026 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran
======================================================
Rohit Kumar Yadav @ Rohit Yadav Son of Saheb Yadav Resident of Village-
Jai Chapra, P.S.- Manjhi, District- Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-07-2026 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
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 129 liters of liquor from a place near bank of Saryu
river and 3.75 liters of liquor from possession of Mala Devi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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.46344 of 2026(2) dt.14-07-2026
2/3
at the instance of local person, but then the name of the person
who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the
FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution
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.
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 Manjhi
P.S. Case No. 242 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 even
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46344 of 2026(2) dt.14-07-2026
3/3
verification if 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.