Patna High Court
Rustam Yadav @ Rustam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Rustam Yadav applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Sections 30(a), 37(c) and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018, alleging recovery of ten litres of liquor from a joint family house. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and a confession made in police custody lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these 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 criminal antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail may be cancelled; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances.
- Whether the recovery of liquor from a joint family house and the absence of possession negate the charge.
- Whether a confession made in police custody is admissible for bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- joint family property
- confession in custody
- bail bond
- sureties
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91913 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-442 Year-2025 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai
======================================================
Rustam Yadav @ Rustam Kumar S/o Natho Yadav @ Natho Prasad Yadav
R/o vill - Danauli Phulwaria, P.S.- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 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), 37(c) and 41(i)
of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10 litres of liquor from the house of Natho Prasad
Yadav. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from
the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious
possession and the house in question is a joint family property,
as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner
who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the
house was within his knowledge and his father was made to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91913 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
confess the name of the petitioner in police custody which does
not have any evidentiary value.
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 Judge-II, Begusarai in connection with Ballia P.S. Case
No.442 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
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91913 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
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…