Patna High Court
Rooplal @ Rooplal MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Rooplal Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 197 litres of liquor. The petitioner argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, the alleged recovery occurred on a property not belonging to him, and the primary evidence was a confessional statement of an apprehended accused, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. He also contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC. The order was conditioned that if more than six prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement of an apprehended accused constitutes sufficient evidence to deny anticipatory bail.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act on the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender for bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10087 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2025 Thana- KANHAULI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Rooplal @ Rooplal Mahto S/o- Late Ram Lakshan Mahto Resident Of
Village- Araria Ps- Kanhauli District-Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umeshanand Pandit
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-03-2026 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 six cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 197 litres of liquor from the
field of Asharfi Sahani.
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 even alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10087 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
apprehended accused in police custody, which does not have
any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that after Amendment
in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that police in majority of cases implicating innocent
persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret
information and confessional statement in a mechanical manner
without holding a proper investigation.
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.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty 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 Kanhauli P. S. Case No.177 of 2025, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10087 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than six cases, 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 six cases only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…