Pankaj Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19026 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2025 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== Pankaj Yadav S/o- Chandra Shekhar Rai R/o Village - Deraganj PS - Bakhtiyarpur District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-04-2025
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 has antecedent of four cases.
4. Allegation is of recovery of 1040.4 litres of liquor from a Truck and a Scorpio, out of which 27 litres of liquor is alleged to have been recovered from the Scorpio. Further, four persons were arrested from the truck and one accused was apprehended from the Scorpio.
5. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19026 of 2025(2) dt.23-04-2025 2/3 that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized truck and the Scorpio. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that both the vehicles are commercial vehicles and thus are used for commercial purposes, as such, no prudent businessman would bring disrepute to his own business by committing such occurrence. It is submitted that since petitioner has antecedent, as such, he came to be implicated in the instant case.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. 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 Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Special Excise P.S. Case No. 129 of 2025 arising out of Bihta
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19026 of 2025(2) dt.23-04-2025 3/3 P.S. Case No. 13 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. 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 more than four cases 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 has antecedent of only four cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T