CR. MISC./60066/2026 of Arun Yadav Vs The State of Bihar on 21 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

21-08-2026

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

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of 25.2 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and 18 litres of liquor from orchard of Rajvanshi Chauhdary.

4. 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 he has no concern or relation with Rajvanshi but then came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized motorcycle. It is next Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60066 of 2026(2) dt.21-08-2026

submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term.

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

6. 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 Mirganj P. S. Case No.124 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60066 of 2026(2) dt.21-08-2026

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.

vikash/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T