Abdhesh Yadav @ Avdesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27075 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2025 Thana- KUSHESHWARASTHAN DistrictDarbhanga ====================================================== Abdhesh Yadav @ Avdesh Yadav S/O Jiwan Yadav Resident of VillageTarso, P.S- Kusheshwar Asthan, District- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjit Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-04-2026

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 one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 8.250 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner.

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 even the house in question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27075 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026 2/3 with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.

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.5,000/- (Rupees 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 Kusheshwar Asthan P. S. Case No.394 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27075 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026 3/3

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 the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, 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 one case only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T