Azad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20461 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- Champanagar District- Purnia ====================================================== Ranu Yadav @ Ranu Kumar Yadav Son of Anand Prasad Yadav R/O Vill.- Oli Tola, ward no. 8 P.S.- Maranga, District- Purnea. At Permanent Address Dighri Dighrisalempur P.S.- Korha, District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 20826 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- Champanagar District- Purnia ====================================================== Azad Yadav Son of Binod Yadav R/v- Maranga West W.No-8, Maranga DistPurnea ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 20461 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Renuka Ratnakar (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 20826 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Renuka Ratnakr (App 125) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2026 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 20461 of 2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2/6
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 111(i), 111(ii) of the BNS read with Sections 30(a), 36, 41(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by order dated 08.04.2026 passed by a learned Co-ordinate Bench, the case diary and criminal antecedent report were called for and the case diary has been received, but the criminal antecedent report is still awaited.
4. The Court will not wait endlessly for the criminal antecedent report of the petitioner.
5. It is next submitted petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1075. 68 liters of liquor from a parcel vehicle.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Ajit in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of
3/6 Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
8. 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 Trial Court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Champanagar P.S. Case No. 27 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
9. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two
4/6 cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 20826 of 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 offences punishable under Sections 111(i), 111(ii) of the BNS read with Sections 30(a), 36, 41(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by order dated 08.04.2026 passed by a learned Co-ordinate Bench, the case diary and criminal antecedent report were called for and the case diary has been received, but the criminal antecedent report is still awaited.
4. The Court will not wait endlessly for the criminal antecedent report of the petitioner.
5. It is next submitted petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1075. 68 liters of liquor from a parcel vehicle.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
5/6 owner of the seized vehicle and came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Ajit in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
8. 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 Trial Court 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 Trial Court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Champanagar P.S. Case No. 27 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
9. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
6/6 than four cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of four cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T