Patna High Court
Dhiraj Yadav @ Dhiraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of antecedents, with the order to be confirmed if the antecedents disclosed are accurate.
Summary
Petitioners Dhiraj Yadav and Pradip Yadav applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Excise Act, alleging that the liquor recovered was not in their conscious possession and that the field from which it was seized did not belong to them. They argued that the police had acted on unreliable information and that a prudent person would not use his own premises to commit a crime. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioners be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 each with two sureties, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if the verification shows more antecedent cases than disclosed, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed. The application was allowed, granting anticipatory bail with conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners' claim of lack of conscious possession and ownership of the field is sufficient to merit bail.
- Whether the presence of prior criminal antecedents affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 30(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88036 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-423 Year-2024 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
1. Dhiraj Yadav @ Dhiraj Kumar S/O Bhagwan Yadav R/O Vill.- Pachauta,
P.S. and District- Lakhisarai
2. Pradip Yadav @ Pradip Kumar S/O Rajkumar Yadav R/O Vill.- Pachauta,
P.S. and District- Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mayank Bilochan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a), 30(c) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise
Act and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of even one case and the
allegation is of recovery of 10 litres of liquor from field of
Dhiraj Kumar.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88036 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession and it is asserted and
submitted that the field from where liquor was recovered does
not belong to Dhiraj Kumar. It is next submitted that no prudent
person would use their own premises for committing a crime
and thus, would create evidence against themself and hence,
would get implicated. It is next submitted that police in majority
of cases implicating innocent persons either at the behest of
Chaukidar, local person, secret information and confessional
statement in a mechanical manner without holding proper
investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum 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 Lakhisarai P. S. Case No.423 of 2024, subject
to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88036 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners 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
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their antecedent
before this Court, in that event, the present provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on
verification, it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one
case only and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of even one case, in
that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…