Lalbabu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 08-05-2026

¶13

Heard Mr. Dhananjay Mishra, learned counsel for

¶14

the petitioners and Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

Petitioners seek bail who are in custody since 24.03.2026 in connection with Rasulpur P.S. Case No. 89 of 2026 for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.

¶16

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the allegation against the petitioners is of recovery of 24.090 liters of English wine from behind the house of the petitioners.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and it appears from the FIR

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32171 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026 2/3

¶19

that petitioners have been made accused in the present case on the basis of suspicion and recovery of 24.090 liters of English wine has been made from behind the house of the petitioners. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no role at all with the alleged recovery of liquor and petitioners are in custody since 24.03.2026.

¶20

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the 2nd learned Exclusive Special Judge, Saran at Chapra in connection with Rasulpur P.S. Case No. 89 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶23

ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32171 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026 3/3

¶25

move for cancellation of bail.

¶26

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶27

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶28

Gaurav Sinha/-

¶29

U T

Lalbabu Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalbabu Yadav 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

Raushan Kumar @ Roshan Kumar Vs The Special Vigilance Unit through the Superintendent of Police.

Bajrangi Kumar @ Bajarangi Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Parwej Alam @ Prawej Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Guddu Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Uday Kumar Vs The State of Bihar