Patna High Court
Devendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that the lack of direct incriminating material against the petitioner and procedural deficiencies outweighed the seriousness of the charges, warranting the grant of bail with conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Devendra Yadav, was charged under IPC sections 272, 273, 414, 34 and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 594 litres of liquor recovered from a car. He claimed innocence, stating he was neither the owner nor driver of the vehicle and that the only link to him was a co‑accused’s confessional statement, which he argued lacked evidentiary value. The prosecution opposed bail, while the petitioner highlighted the absence of any material in his possession and procedural lapses such as non‑compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The court, after considering the facts, the petitioner’s custody period, and his six prior criminal antecedents (all on bail), decided to grant bail subject to strict conditions. The bail order required a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties, a family member as a bailor, regular court appearances, non‑tampering with evidence, and a prohibition on committing similar offences.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving serious offences under the IPC and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused provides sufficient basis to deny bail.
- Whether non‑compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34, 414
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- IPC
- prohibition act
- evidentiary value
- co‑accused confession
- procedural compliance
- criminal antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9271 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2019 Thana- LAUKAHI District- Madhubani
======================================================
Devendra Yadav S/O Late Shivcharan Yadav @ Late Ram Sharan Yadav R/O
Village- Chichodhwa Thadhi, Ward no. 10, PS- Laukahi, District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Laukahi P.S. Case No. 256 of 2019, instituted for the offences
punishable under Sections 272, 273, 414, 34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Earlier, anticipatory bail of the petitioner was
dismissed as withdrawn by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 22.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 59888 of
2025.
4. The prosecution case, in short, is that 594 liters
liquor was recovered from a car.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9271 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
2/3
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from
the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has got
no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. Learned counsel
for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner is neither
owner nor driver of the car in question. The petitioner was not
arrested on spot. Name of the petitioner has transpired in this
case on the basis of confessional statement made by co-accused,
namely, Fuldev Yadav and the same has got no evidentiary
value. The petitioner is in custody since 15.09.2025 and has got
six criminal antecedents in which he is on bail. There is no
compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
6. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the period of custody undergone by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail after framing
of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9271 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
3/3
Court in connection with Laukahi P.S. Case No. 256 of 2019,
subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial and shall not remain absent on two consecutive
dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence
or the witnesses during the trial.
(IV) Petitioner shall not commit offence of similar
nature in future.
If any of the above conditions are violated, the Trial
Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.