Patna High Court

Gorelal YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 22 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the conditions imposed.

Summary

The petitioner, Gorelal Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32 of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly having 57.375 litres of liquor seized from his auto. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and that the vehicle was misused by his driver without his knowledge. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; if the petitioner is found to have a clean record, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Excise Act offences.
Whether ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence implicates the petitioner.
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants provisional bail pending verification.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise offence
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Bihar Excise Act
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83035 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-339 Year-2024 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger
                 ======================================================
                 Gorelal Yadav Son of Late Babu Lal Yadav R/o Villaege - Shivnandanpur,
                 P.S. - Sultanjagaj and Dist. - Bhagalpur.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Verma, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-01-2026                  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

                   32 of the Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 57.375 liters of liquor from an Auto.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing

                   was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be

                   implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized Auto.

                   It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own

                   vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would create
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83035 of 2025(2) dt.22-01-2026
                                            2/3




          evidence against himself and hence would get implicated, it is

          also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his

          driver 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, 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 Munger

          Muffasil P.S. Case No. 339 of 2024 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 even

          one case 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

          anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83035 of 2025(2) dt.22-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      verification if it is found that petitioner is a person with clean

                      antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                      shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                              (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…