Patna High Court
Munna YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions.
Summary
Munna Yadav applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging recovery of 141 litres of liquor from a river bank, alleged offences under IPC sections 272, 273, 34 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. He argued he has a clean antecedent, the liquor was not in his possession, the location is public, and the informant’s identity was omitted from the FIR. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and verification of his criminal antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulates that if any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed immediately. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in view of the alleged offences under IPC and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the facts – no possession, public location, undisclosed informant – justify granting bail.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. can be invoked to impose conditions on anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC
- liquor seizure
- Bihar Prohibition Act
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91131 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2024 Thana- ANDHRAMATH District- Madhubani
======================================================
Munna Yadav Son of Birendra Yadav R/o Village - Jiroga, P.S. - Andhramath,
District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nitu Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 141 litres of liquor from bank of a river. 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 local person but the name of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91131 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed
in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bond in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge
Excise Act, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani in connection with
Andhramath P.S. Case No.112 of 2024, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91131 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…