Sikandar Yadav @ Sikendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7613 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-357 Year-2025 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
           1.     Sikandar Yadav @ Sikendra Yadav S/O Krishnadev Yadav R/O Village-
                  Bishunpur, P.S. - Ladaniya (Ladania), District - Madhubani, Bihar.
           2.    Durgesh Yadav S/O Sunil Yadav R/O Village- Bishunpur, P.S. - Ladaniya
                 (Ladania), District - Madhubani, Bihar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-02-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275

                   and 3(5) of BNS and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioner no.1 has antecedent of nine cases, out of which six

                   cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner no.2 has

                   antecedent of six cases, out of which, four cases are under the

                   Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1005.15 litres of

                   liquor from a mango orchard of petitioner no.1 along with a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7613 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                            2/3




          motorcycle. It is next submitted that petitioners were not

          arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their

          conscious possession and the mango orchard does not belong to

          the petitioner no.1 but since petitioners have antecedent under

          the Excise Act, as such they came to be implicated at the

          instance of chowkidar. It is also submitted that petitioners are

          not the owners of any of the seized vehicle. It is also submitted

          that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise,

          the police starts implicating mechanically either through

          chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

                       5. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the

          event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

          within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs.45,000/- (Rupees forty five thousand) each 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 Ladaniya P.S. Case No.357/2025, subject to the conditions
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7613 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                                    6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court

                       thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners

                       and in the event if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent

                       of more than nine cases and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of

                       more than six cases, in that event, it would be presumed that

                       petitioners had concealed their antecedent before this court, as

                       such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

                       confirmed with but if after verification it is found that petitioner

                       no.1 has antecedent of nine cases and petitioner no.2 has

                       antecedent of six cases, in that event, the provisional

                       anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T