Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Provisional anticipatory bail: upon arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks, release on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Court of Exclusive Special Excise Court No.-4, Gaya in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No.596 of 2025, subject to Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. conditions; confirmation contingent on trial-Court verification of criminal antecedents (not confirmed if more than two cases; confirmed forthwith if only two).

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner, who apprehends arrest in Fatehpur P.S. Case No.596 of 2025 registered for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, the petitioner is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing a bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Court of Exclusive Special Excise Court No.-4, Gaya, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Key takeaways

The anticipatory bail application stands allowed.ratio¶¶20
The learned trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner after accepting his provisional bail bonds.ratio¶¶21
If verification finds the petitioner has antecedents of more than two cases, it would be presumed that he had concealed his antecedent for the purpose of obtaining anticipatory bail, and the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail – excise offence – Patna High Court (Satyavrat Verma, J), 17-01-2026, Crl. Misc. No.89101 of 2025 arising from Fatehpur P.S. Case No.596 of 2025, District Gaya, registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. Petitioner Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar, apprehending arrest, was directed to be released on PROVISIONAL anticipatory bail upon arrest or surrender within six weeks, on a bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each before the Court of Exclusive Special Excise Court No.-4, Gaya, subject to the conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. Counsel conceded antecedents of two Excise Act cases and pleaded that the alleged recovery of 300 litres of liquor was from the house of one Mahendra Yadav, unrelated to the petitioner, who was implicated on secret information without arrest from the spot. The Court made confirmation conditional: the trial Court shall verify criminal antecedents after accepting the provisional bail bonds — if more than two cases are found, concealment will be presumed and the provisional order shall not be confirmed; if only two cases are found, the provisional order shall be confirmed forthwith. Application allowed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89101 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-596 Year-2025 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya

======================================================

Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar S/O Gursahay Yadav R/O Village-Bahera, P.S.-Fatehpur, Dist.-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Onkar Nath, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 17-01-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedents of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 300 litres of liquor from house of Mahendra Yadav. It is next submitted 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 and petitioner has no concern or relation with Mahendra Yadav and he came to be implicated based on secret information which is the easiest way

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89101 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026 2/3

to implicate someone without holding a proper investigation. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information.

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

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-bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of Exclusive Special Excise Court No.-4, Gaya in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No.596 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

The application stands allowed.

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 antecedents of more than two cases,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89101 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026 3/3

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 antecedents of only two cases, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

Sanjay/-

U T