Sanjeet Yadav @ Sanjit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2486 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2024 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Sanjeet Yadav @ Sanjit Yadav S/o Late Anjan Yadav @ Late Anjani Yadav R/o vill - Salarpur, P.S.- Parbatta, Distt.- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 25 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner which is under construction.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that the house is under construction, as such, no one is staying in the house at the present and it appears that someone inimical to the family of the petitioner concealed the meager amount of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2486 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026 2/3 liquor with a view to implicate the entire family members. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own premises for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Parbatta P.S. Case No. 01 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2486 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026 3/3
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.1,500/- with the Lawyers' Association of the Patna High Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T