Patna High Court
Nandeswar Mandal @ Nandeshwar MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedent under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.
Summary
The petitioners, Nandeswar Mandal and Ram Praves Mandal, applied for anticipatory bail in a case alleging recovery of 540 litres of liquor from a Maruti car, invoking Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act. They argued they have a clean antecedent, were not arrested at the spot, are not owners of the vehicle, and were implicated solely on a confessional statement of an accused in police custody, which they claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the offences are serious and the alleged possession is sufficient to deny bail. The Court noted the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act that abolished the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender, and considered the petitioners’ clean record. It granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 each with two sureties and subject to verification of antecedent under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. If any criminal antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed. The order was made subject to the trial court’s verification and the bail was confirmed if the petitioners remain clean.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving alleged possession of liquor under Sections 274, 275, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 30(a), 41(1) of the Excise Act
- Whether a confessional statement of an accused in police custody can be the basis for denying anticipatory bail
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act removing the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender on bail considerations
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 274, 275, 3(5), 482(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- B.N.S.
- deemed possession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22181 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2025 Thana- LAUKAHA District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Nandeswar Mandal @ Nandeshwar Mandal Son of Late Ganeshi Mandal
Resident of Village-Channipur Police Station-Laukaha District-Madhubani
2. Ram Praves Mandal @ Shree Ram Mandal @ Ram Pravesh Mandal Son of
Dular Mandal Resident of Village-Channipur Police Station-Laukaha
District-Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 30(a) and
41(1) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the
allegation is of recovery of 540 litres of liquor from a Maruti
car.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22181 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner
of the seized vehicle and they came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of apprehended accused in police
custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is further
submitted that after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each 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 Laukaha P. S. Case No.197 of 2025, G.R.
No.763 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22181 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case,
then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their 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 petitioners are persons with clean
antecedent, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.