Rameshwar Prasad Yadav @ Gullay Prasad Yadav @ Rameshwar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90924 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2022 Thana- KADAMKUAN District- Patna ====================================================== Rameshwar Prasad Yadav @ Gullay Prasad Yadav @ Rameshwar Yadav S/oLate Tola Prasad Yadav R/v- Saidpur, Lala Toli Po- Bankipore PsKadamKuan Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Syed Mohammad Ibrahim Quli, Advocate Mr. Adil Abbas, Advocate Mr. Vishal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-01-2026

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 offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 1.125 liters of liquor from house of Bablu Prasad.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90924 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026 2/3 question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was 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 in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Bablu in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.

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, 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 Kadam Kuan P.S. Case No. 342 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90924 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026 3/3 in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T