Patna High Court
Vinod YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Vinod Yadav and Badhu Kumar, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 25 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. They argued they had no possession of the liquor, were not the owners of the vehicle, and were implicated solely on a confessional statement made by a co‑accused while in police custody, which they claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed their request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and sureties, directing the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedents within six weeks. It further stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn for that petitioner, but if they are found to have clean records, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody can be relied upon for arrest.
- Whether the petitioners have a clean criminal antecedent affecting the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88923 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2017 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna
======================================================
1. Vinod Yadav S/o Late Ganauri Yadav Resident of Village - Badroi, P.S -
Masaurhi, District - Patna
2. Badhu Kumar @ Badhu Yadav S/o Lala Prasad Resident of Village - Badroi,
P.S - Masaurhi, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Shanker Pankaj
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Sangeeta Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 25 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 are not the owner
of the seized motorcycle and they came to be implicated based
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88923 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
on confessional statement of Santosh in police custody which
does not have any evidentiary value.
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.
500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Punpun
P.S. Case No. 236 of 2017, 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 petitioners have 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
be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his
criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is
found that petitioners are person with clean antecedent in that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88923 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…