Gayanand Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 15 July, 2025

Patna High Court – Orders

Gayanand Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 15 July, 2025

Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma

Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39837 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2022 Thana- BITHAN District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Gayanand Yadav son of Late Ramratan Yadav Resident of Village- Kurwan
                 Tola Akonma PS- Hasanpur, Dist- Samastipur

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Sarbottam Kumar Sarkar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-07-2025

Heard Mr.Sarbottam Kumar Sarkar, learned counsel

for the petitioner and Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

connection with Bithan P.S.Case No.164 of 2022,FIR dated

13.09.2022 registered for the offences punishable under

Sections 419,420,467,471,34 of IPC and Sections

30(a),32(1),32(2),41(1) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise

(Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. Recovery is of 2190.6 liters of illegal foreign

liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

implicated in the present case. Altogether 2190.6 liters of illegal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39837 of 2025(2) dt.15-07-2025
2/4

foreign liquor was recovered from the vehicle in question. It

appears from the FIR as well as the seizure list that nothing has

been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner

rather the recovery has been made from the Bus and Motorcycle

in question and from a bare perusal of the FIR, it appears that

four persons were apprehended at the place of occurrence but

they have not disclosed the name of the petitioner and petitioner

has been made accused in the present case merely on the ground

that he is owner of one of the motorcycles in question. Learned

counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the petitioner has

given the motorcycle in question to one Pappu Kumar, who is

son-in-law of the petitioner and he was apprehended alongwith

illicit liquor and petitioner has been made accused in the present

case merely on the ground that he is owner of the motorcycle in

question. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure

prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C./Section

103 of BNSS, 2023. No case, whatsoever, would be made out

against the petitioners under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

Act.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner referring the

provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39837 of 2025(2) dt.15-07-2025
3/4

and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-arrest bail would not

be maintainable.

6. This Court is aware of the decision of the Full

Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav Vs. State of Bihar

reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 1089. Having regard to the law laid

down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on

behalf of the parties, this Court for the limited purpose of grant

of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of

Counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean

antecedent, nothing has been recovered from conscious

possession of the petitioner and even the apprehended co-

accused persons have not disclosed the name of the petitioner

and petitioner has been made accused in the present case merely

on the ground that he is owner of the motorcycle in question, let

the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or

surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days

from the date of receipt of the order, 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 learned

Exclusive Special Excise 1st , Samastipur in connection with

Bithan P.S.Case No.164 of 2022, subject to the conditions as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39837 of 2025(2) dt.15-07-2025
4/4

laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other

following conditions:-

(I) Petitioner 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 his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

for cancellation of bail.

(III) And, further condition that the court below shall

verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her

criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-

U        T