Patna High Court
Mahendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to a bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Mahendra Yadav applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for the alleged recovery of 18.75 litres of liquor from his motorcycle. He argued that he had no knowledge of the liquor, that the vehicle was being used by his son, and that he had a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence is sufficient ground for arrest.
- Whether provisional anticipatory bail can be conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 32(3)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 482
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91455 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-958 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya
======================================================
Mahendra Yadav S/O Meghan Yadav Resident of Village- Jhanakpur, P.S.-
Mohanpur, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, 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 30(a) and
32(3) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 18.75 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such,
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he
came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of
seized motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person
would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and
thus, would create evidence against himself and hence, would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91455 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his son, Manoj Kumar would misuse
the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot along with Nitish Kumar.
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 Exclusive Special
Excise Court No.3, Gaya in connection with Gaya Excise P.S.
Case No.958 of 2025, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91455 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
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…