Patna High Court
Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted subject to bail bonds and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the order to be confirmed only if the antecedent does not exceed five cases.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act alleging recovery of 17.2 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He argued that he was not in possession of the seized vehicle, was not arrested at the spot, and that the only evidence was a confessional statement of a co-accused taken in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioner’s antecedent of five prior Excise cases. The Court, noting the lack of direct possession and the questionable reliability of the confessional statement, granted provisional anticipatory bail on condition of furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000 with two sureties and directed verification of his criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if more than five prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under Section 30(a) Excise Act and his prior criminal antecedent.
- Whether the confessional statement of the co-accused can be relied upon as evidence for denying bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9991 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2023 Thana- EXCISE ARERAJ District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Yadav Son of Nagina Yadav Resident of
Village-Sareya Tola mathiya , (Sonwal Godam), Police Station-Malahi,
District-East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Ranjan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 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 five cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 17.2 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
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 is not the owner of
the seized motorcycle and he came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9991 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
confessional statement of Srikant in police custody, which does
not have any evidentiary value. 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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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 Areraj Excise P. S. Case No.116 of 2023,
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9991 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five 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 five cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…