Yuvraj Kumar @ Bunty Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Eashita Raj For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 17-04-2026

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶12

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 272, 273 and 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

¶13

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 79.02 litres of liquor from a place near a poultry farm.

¶14

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 alleged recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24074 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026 2/3

¶16

and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom his brother is on an inimical term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner 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. It is also submitted that it appears that Chaukidar in order to coerce his brother into submission falsely implicated the petitioner.

¶17

Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

¶18

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 Mahua P. S. Case No.191 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶19

The application stands allowed.

¶20

It is made clear that the learned trial Court after

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24074 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026 3/3

¶22

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.

¶23

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶24

vikash/-

¶25

U T

Yuvraj Kumar @ Bunty Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yuvraj Kumar @ Bunty Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Asraful Vs The State of Bihar

Om Prakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shivandra Kumar Ray @ Shivam Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Muslim @ Mohd. Muslim Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul kumar Vs The State of Bihar