Patna High Court
Vikky Yadav @ Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar @ Vikky 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) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Vikky Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case alleging violation of Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 870.120 litres of liquor from a tractor. He contended that he was not arrested at the scene, had no possession of the seized liquor, was not the owner of the tractor, and that the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by Sonu Rishi while in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioner’s antecedent of nine prior cases, eight of which are under the Excise Act. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs.45,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if the trial court finds more than nine prior cases, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC when the petitioner has multiple prior criminal cases and is alleged to be involved in a large liquor seizure under the Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody, lacking corroborative evidence, can be a basis to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether concealment of the extent of prior criminal antecedents affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- confessional statement
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65531 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-159 Year-2025 Thana- Mufassil District- Purnia
======================================================
Vikky Yadav @ Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar @ Vikky Yadav S/O Uma
Kant Yadav @ Dilip Kumar Singh R/O Village- Belwa Kamat, P.S- Muffasil,
District- Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. K. Agrawal- Sr. Advocate
Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 07-01-2026 1. Heard learned senior 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 senior counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has antecedent of nine cases out of
which eight cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of
recovery of 870.120 litres of liquor from a tractor.
4. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner
submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such,
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not
the owner of the seized tractor and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65531 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
based on confessional statement of Sonu Rishi in police custody,
which does not have any evidentiary value. 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.45,000/- (Rupees Forty 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 Mufassil P. S. Case No.159 of 2025, 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.65531 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than nine 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 nine cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…