Patna High Court
Anand Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Anand Kumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after a FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 alleging recovery of 198.75 litres of liquor from a bush not belonging to him. He argued he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and that the chaukidar who implicated him failed to inform police beforehand. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail for six weeks on the condition of a Rs.500 bail bond with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise it would be confirmed. The decision hinged on the lack of direct possession, the petitioner’s clean record, and procedural safeguards under the bail provisions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016
- Whether the absence of possession of the alleged liquor and the petitioner’s clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail
- Whether the chaukidar’s failure to inform police prior to filing the FIR affects the merits of the bail application
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Criminal antecedent
- possession
- liquor seizure
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7400 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-250 Year-2025 Thana- KEWATI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Anand Kumar Yadav son of Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village- Samaila Police
Station -Raiyam District -Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 198.75 litres of liquor from a bush.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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 belong to the petitioner.
It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at
the instance of the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the
Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7400 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the
institution of the instant 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, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender 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 Keoti P.S. Case No. 250 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./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 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
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7400 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
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…