Patna High Court
Baldev Yadav @ Baaldev YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
Baldev Yadav applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 125 litres of liquor. The petitioner argued that he was not arrested at the scene, the alleged contraband was recovered from a public place, and the case was based on secret information without proper investigation. He disclosed that he had two prior criminal cases, one also under the Excise Act. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedents and to confirm or set aside the bail accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the absence of arrest at the scene and the nature of the alleged recovery justify anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92059 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2025 Thana- TANKUPPA District- Gaya
======================================================
Baldev Yadav @ Baaldev Yadav Son of Ramji Yadav Resident of Mohallah-
Laxmipur, P.S.- Tankuppa, Dist.- Gaya Ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prithivi Raj Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Syed Mojibur Rahman
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of two cases out of which one case
is under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 125
litres of liquor from a sack at village Lakhimpur.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92059 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
based on secret information, which is the easiest way to
implicate someone without holding a proper investigation. It is
next submitted that police in majority of cases implicating
innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person,
secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical
manner without holding proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. 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-bonds in the
sum 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 Tankuppa P. S. Case No.237 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92059 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases,
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 not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…