Patna High Court
Ravi Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Ravi Kumar Yadav and Vinay Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 37 of the Excise Act and Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act. The FIR alleged recovery of four empty liquor bottles, four cartridges and a motorcycle, and the petitioners' names were mentioned in a confessional statement of a co‑accused, Munna, who was in police custody. The petitioners contended they have clean antecedents, were not in possession of the seized items, and that the confessional statement lacks evidentiary value. The State argued that the informant’s information and the confessional statement, though unproved, linked the petitioners to the offence and that the investigation is ongoing. The High Court, after considering the submissions, declined to grant anticipatory bail, holding that the circumstances did not merit the privilege.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners when their names appear only in a confessional statement of a co‑accused and the investigation is ongoing.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)a, 26, 27, 35
- Excise Act — s. 37
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- confessional statement
- false implication
- Excise Act
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- bail
- police investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90239 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-653 Year-2025 Thana- RAMKRISHNANAGAR District- Patna
======================================================
1. Ravi Kumar Yadav Anil Kumar @ Anil Yadav Resident Of Village-
Rahimpur, P.S- Parsa, District- Patna
2. Vinay Kumar S/O Vijay Thakur @ Vijay Sharma Resident Of Village-
Rahimpur, P.S- Parsa, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sheo Kumar Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandar Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 27-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 37 of the
Excise Act and Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of four empty bottles of liquor along with four
cartridges and a motorcycle as detailed in the FIR, it is next
alleged that police on receiving information that occurrence of
firing had taken place, had reached the place of occurrence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90239 of 2025(4) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
when Munna was apprehended.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case at the
instance of confessional statement of Munna. It is further
submitted that there is no allegation of any recovery from the
possession of the petitioners rather the name of the petitioners
transpired based on the confessional statement of apprehended-
accused in police custody which does not have any evidentiary
value. It is also submitted that petitioners are not the owner of
the seized motorcycle; and the cartridges along with empty
bottles of liquor are alleged to have been recovered from a semi-
constructed house at Madhuban colony and petitioners have no
concern or relation with the place of occurrence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that no doubt
name of the petitioners transpired in the confessional statement
of Munna in police custody which does not have any evidentiary
value but then the informant alleges that he received an
information that accused are resorting to firing based on which
he reached the place of occurrence from where the aforesaid
articles were seized and Munna was apprehended and it was
concessional statement of Munna that name of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90239 of 2025(4) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
transpired, it is also submitted that investigation in the case is
still continuing.
6. Considering the submission made by learned APP,
the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioners is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…