Patna High Court

Tapan Yadav @ Tapan Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 7 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Tapan Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning alleged recovery of 35 litres of liquor from a public hut near a temple. He has two prior criminal cases, one also under the Excise Act, but the alleged liquor was not found in his possession and the informant’s name was omitted from the FIR. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would be revoked, whereas confirmation would follow if only two antecedents are verified.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
criminal antecedent
provisional bail
public place
FIR

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69516 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-438 Year-2025 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Tapan Yadav @ Tapan Kumar Yadav son of Late Suresh Yadav Resident Of
                 Village -Chutikiya Bazar, Ps -Malsalami, Ps -Malsalami, Dist -Patna

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Arvind Prasad Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms.Sangeeta Sharma
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   07-01-2026               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 the

                   petitioner has antecedent of two cases out of which one is under

                   the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 35 litres of liquor

                   from a hut situated near a temple.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belongs to the

                   petitioner and is accessible to public at large and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69516 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
                                            2/3




          implicated at the instance of local people, 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.

          10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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

          Malsalami P.S. Case No. 438 of 2025, 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 more

          than two cases 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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69516 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after

                        verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two

                        cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                        be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…