Patna High Court
Anuj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedent.
Summary
Anuj Kumar and Raja Kumar sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, alleging that the liquor recovered was from a hut not belonging to them and that the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by Neeraj in police custody. They contended they have a clean antecedent and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs. 500 and two sureties, directing the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedent and conditionally confirm the bail if no antecedent is found, otherwise it would be withdrawn. The order emphasizes verification of antecedent before confirming bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where alleged possession is disputed.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody, lacking evidentiary value, can justify arrest.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29980 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2026 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Anuj Kumar S/o Surendra Paswan R/o Village - Hindu Chakia, P.S - Chakia,
District - East Champaran
2. Raja Kumar S/o Rambabu Mahto R/o Village - Hindu Chakia, P.S - Chakia,
District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Suraj Kumar Tiwari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent but at para-5 of the
order impugned, it is wrongly recorded that petitioners have
antecedent of one case. It is next submitted that allegation is of
recovery of 294.52 litres of liquor from a hut near the house of
Niraj.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29980 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a hut which does not belong to the petitioners
but then they came to be implicated based on confessional
statement of Neeraj 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.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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) 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 Chakia P.S. Case No. 92 of 2026, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section Section 482(2) of the
BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the
event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29980 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before
this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not
be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his
criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is
found that petitioners are person with clean antecedent in that
event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…