Patna High Court
Guddu Yadav @ Guddu RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
Guddu Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of 306 litres of liquor from the Bagmati River. He argued that he was not caught in possession, the alleged liquor was recovered from a public river, and that a hostile watchman (chawkidar) had falsely implicated him, noting his prior thirteen excise cases. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.65,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., and ordered the trial court to verify his criminal antecedent, with the bail to be confirmed only if the antecedent does not exceed thirteen cases.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of thirteen cases affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Cr.P.C. Section 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8813 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-328 Year-2025 Thana- SUPPI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Rai S/o Mahendra Yadav @ Mahendra Rai R/O vill-
Masaha Alam, Ward No 03, P.S. - Bairgania, Dist- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-04-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of thirteen cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 306 litres of liquor from the
bank of Bagmati River.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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
and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8813 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026
2/3
petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the
Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next
submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement
of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform
the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted
that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the
police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation of the case.
It is lastly submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier
also came to be implicated in cases relating to excise.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.65,000/-
(Rupees Sixty-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 Suppi
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8813 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026
3/3
P.S. Case No. 328 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
thirteen cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the
anticipatory bail application in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is found
on verification that petitioner has antecedent of only thirteen
cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…