IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57774 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2026 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Bhogi Yadav @ Bhogendra Prasad Yadav S/o Rameshwar Yadav R/o vill - Pithwa Tol, ward no.9, Ushrahi, P.S.- Deodha, Distt.- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Kumari Pallavi For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 19-08-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 66 litres of liquor from a place near semi- constructed boundary wall of the house of the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57774 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026 2/3 the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge of the petitioner. 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 and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Satto Mukhiya in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value and petitioner has no relation or concern with Satto Mukhiya. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Jaynagar P.S. Case No. 298 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. 7. 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 even one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57774 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026 3/3 seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. Sumit/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T