Patna High Court
Vijay Yadav @ Vijo YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to a bond, sureties and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the petitioner having no more than two prior cases.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 30(a), 30(c) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act for alleged recovery of 110 litres of liquor from a public area. He contended that no liquor was found in his possession, the recovery site did not belong to him, and the complaint was based solely on the testimony of a chowkidar who failed to inform police earlier. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. It further held that if the petitioner is found to have more than two prior cases, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are valid for confirming or cancelling bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedents
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- excise offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90952 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-267 Year-2025 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria
======================================================
Vijay Yadav @ Vijo Yadav S/O Dhoko Yadav R/O Village- Usri, P.S.- Gogari,
Distt.- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 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 Sections 30(a), 30(c)
and 30(d) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of
recovery of 110 litres of liquor from Usri Diyara. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even
alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioner and is accessible to public at large and he came to be
implicated at the instance of chowkidar but then it is submitted
that if chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90952 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to
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 starts
implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local
person, confessional statement or secret information without
holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten 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 Gogari
P.S. Case No.267/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90952 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
two cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner
had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…