Patna High Court
Rajesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Rajesh Yadav, owner of a pickup vehicle, was implicated in the recovery of 2,710.08 litres of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. He argued that the liquor was seized from the vehicle, not from his personal possession, and that he was unaware of its misuse by a person named Subhash. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent within six weeks. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the owner of a vehicle from which liquor was seized under the Bihar Excise Act
- Whether ownership of the vehicle alone establishes culpability for the offence
- Whether the High Court may impose a provisional bail order subject to verification of the petitioner's antecedent
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83304 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-339 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran
======================================================
Rajesh Yadav S/O Jayram Yadav @ JairamYadav Resident of Village -
Sangapur, Maniyar, P.S - Maniyar, District - Ballia, Uttar Pradesh
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 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 Section 30(a) 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 2710.08 liters of liquor from a pick up vehicle.
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
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83304 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated
and at the same time shall bring disrepute to his business, it is
also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Subhash would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who
was also apprehended from the spot.
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 Manjhi
P.S. Case No. 339 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 even
one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83304 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
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
Checking your session…