Patna High Court
PINTU YADAV @ RAJESH KUMARversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the antecedent count.
Summary
The petitioner, Pintu Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged seizure of 5,706.36 litres of liquor from a truck. He argued that he was not caught in possession, was not the vehicle owner, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement of another accused, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner also highlighted his criminal antecedent of eleven cases, asserting that police were targeting persons with prior records without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.55,000 bond with two sureties and directed verification of his antecedents, stipulating that the bail would be confirmed only if his antecedent count did not exceed eleven.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. should be granted to the petitioner in an excise case despite his criminal antecedents and the nature of the evidence.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- criminal antecedent
- confessional statement
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78068 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-462 Year-2022 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
PINTU YADAV @ RAJESH KUMAR Son of Indradev Yadav @ Indradeb
Prasad Yadav Resident of Village - Ghoganpatti, P.S.- Patarghat, District -
Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Rashmi Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-01-2026 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 of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of 11 cases but then was acquitted in
five cases and allegation is of recovery of 5706.36 liters of
liquor from a truck as detailed in the FIR.
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 is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78068 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
2/3
confessional statement of apprehended accused in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also
submitted that since petitioner has antecedents as such of late
police has started implicating persons with criminal antecedent
in excise cases either through chowkidar, local person,
confessional statement or secret information without holding a
proper investigation.
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.
55,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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
Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 462 of 2022 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78068 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
3/3
eleven cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner
had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of
eleven cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.