Patna High Court
Nandev Yadav @ Nand Kishor YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Nandev Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, for the alleged recovery of 50 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and was unaware that a friend misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted detention. The Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438(2) CrPC to a person implicated solely as the owner of a vehicle used in the alleged offence.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72808 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-605 Year-2023 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
Nandev Yadav @ Nand Kishor Yadav S/o Kari Yadav R/o vill - Naya Nagar
Budhma, Ward No. 13, P.S.- Murliganj, Distt.- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 Sections 30(a) and
41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,
2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 50 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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 his own vehicle for committing an occurrence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72808 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
and thus would create evidence against himself and hence
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in
the manner as alleged.
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, let 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 Saur
Bazar P.S. Case No. 605 of 2023, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72808 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…