Patna High Court
Bhim Yadav @ Om Prakash Kumar @ Om PrakashversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to bond, sureties, and verification of criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhim Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a paddy field not belonging to him. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the location was communal, and the informant (chowkidar) did not report his involvement earlier, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.5,000 bond with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If more than one prior case is found, the bail may be revoked; if only one, the provisional bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the circumstances of alleged recovery and lack of possession justify granting bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83282 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2025 Thana- CHARPOKHARI District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Bhim Yadav @ Om Prakash Kumar @ Om Prakash S/o Butadhari Singh @
Kameshwar Singh R/o Village - Sikrahata Bharosi Tola, P.S - Sikrahata,
District - Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravindra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Rabindra Kumar.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a paddy
field.
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 even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83282 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
and is accessible to villagers at large and he came to be
implicated at the instance of Chowkidar but then it is submitted
that if the Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the
petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the
police prior to 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, 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. 5,000/- (Rupees
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 Charpokhari P.S. Case
No. 197 of 2025, 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 more than one
case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83282 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…