Patna High Court
Akhilesh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 351 litres of liquor from a pick‑up vehicle he owned. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that he had a clean antecedent, was not present at the spot of seizure, and was unaware of any misuse of his vehicle by a friend. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The court also ordered verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that any undisclosed prior case would lead to the bail not being confirmed. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the alleged Excise Act offence
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence implicates the petitioner
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- vehicle ownership
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
- Cr.P.C. Section 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65034 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2023 Thana- HATHAURI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Akhilesh Kumar Yadav Son of Ramshreshth Yadav Resident of Village-
Shahbazpur PS -Bochahan Distt -Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shashank Shekhar
Mr.Mukund Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kalyan Shankar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 07-01-2026 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 351 litres of liquor from a pick-up vehicle.
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 the seized
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65034 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, 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.
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
Hathauri P. S. Case No.256 of 2023, 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.65034 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
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…