Patna High Court
Dipesh Kumar @ Dipesh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of criminal antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the antecedent check.
Summary
The petitioners, Dipesh Kumar and Santosh Kumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 10.125 litres of liquor from a sack not in their possession. The petitioners argued that the recovery was from a place not belonging to them and that they were implicated solely on secret information without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing counsel, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties each and subject to verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. It directed that if petitioner No.1 is found to have more than one prior case or petitioner No.2 any prior case, the bail would not be confirmed for that individual; otherwise, the bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Sections 274, 275 BNS and Section 30(a) Excise Act where the alleged contraband was not found in the petitioners' possession.
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275, 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail
- criminal antecedent
- liquor
- excise act
- section 274
- section 275
- section 30(a)
- section 482
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83558 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2025 Thana- LAUKAHI District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Dipesh Kumar @ Dipesh Kumar Yadav S/o- Ram Pravesh Yadav Village-
Mahdeva, PS- Laukahi, District- Madhubani
2. Santosh Kumar Yadav S/o- Tetar Yadav Village- Mahdeva, PS- Laukahi,
District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Bharti
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 22-01-2026 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 and
275 of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent and
allegation is of recovery of 10.125 litres of liquor from a sack.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83558 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and they came to be implicated based on secret
information which is the easiest way to implicate someone
without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. 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 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) 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
Laukhi P.S. Case No. 150 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the
event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more
than one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of even one
case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before
this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83558 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his
criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is
found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case and
petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent in that event
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…