Ankit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

Ankit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Provisional anticipatory bail granted: release on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000 (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court within six weeks, in connection with Hathua P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) BNSS; confirmation contingent on verification of criminal antecedents by the Trial Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in Hathua P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, is entitled to anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

The petitioner is to be released on provisional anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court within six weeks, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where Hathua P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025 is pending, subject to the conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Ratio / Principle

The learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner; if it is found that he has antecedents of more than one case, it would be presumed that he concealed his antecedents before this Court for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, and the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed.

Key takeaways

If, after verification, it is found that the petitioner has antecedent of one case only, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - Bihar Excise Act, Section 30(a) - Hathua P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025, District Gopalganj - alleged recovery of 32.8 liters of liquor from a Scooty; petitioner contends he was not apprehended from the spot, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession, he is not the owner of the seized Scooty, and he was implicated on the confessional statement of one Rahul in police custody - provisional anticipatory bail granted on bail bond of Rs. 5,000 (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, in the event of arrest or surrender within six weeks, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS - Trial Court to verify criminal antecedents; if more than one antecedent found, concealment to be presumed and provisional bail not to be confirmed; if only one antecedent found, provisional bail to be confirmed forthwith.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9056 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-263 Year-2025 Thana- HATHUA District- Gopalganj

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

Ankit Yadav S/O Rajdev Yadav R/O Village- Chhotaka Hathua, P.S.- Hathua, Dist.- Gopalganj, State- Bihar

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Priya Raj For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Iftekhar Mahmood ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

3 28-04-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the defect, as pointed out by the office, stands removed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 32.8 liters of liquor from a Scooty.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized Scooty and came to be implicated based on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9056 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026 2/3

confessional statement of Rahul in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that after amendment in the excise act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

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. 5000/- (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 Hathua P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court 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 seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9056 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026 3/3

antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

Rishabh/-

U T