Shailesh Yadav @ Shailesh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.450 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-423 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Shailesh Yadav @ Shailesh Kumar Yadav son of Banka Yadav Resident of Village - Mujawna PS- Manjhagarh, Dist- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gautam Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-01-2026

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 Act, 2018.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 282.06 litres of liquor from the cattle house of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and cattle house is a place outside the house and thus is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that no prudent person would use his own cattle house for committing an occurrence and thus

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.450 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026 2/3 would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is next submitted that it appears that some villagers slyly concealed the liquor in the cattle house of the petitioner without the knowledge of the petitioner and his family members. It is submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the 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.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 Manjhagarh P.S. Case No. 423 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.

7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.450 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026 3/3 court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than 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 has antecedent of only one case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T