Patna High Court
Shyam Sundar RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Shyam Sundar Ray, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, where liquor was allegedly recovered from other accused and not from his possession. The petitioner argued that the recovery was based solely on a confessional statement of another accused, which lacks evidentiary value, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulates that if the petitioner is found to have more than one prior case, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed. The decision reflects the Court’s application of the amended statutory framework and the need to verify antecedent before confirming bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the alleged offence is based on recovered liquor from other accused and a confessional statement lacking evidentiary value.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act, which removed the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, affects the bail application.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent influences the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10107 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2025 Thana- PUPRI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Shyam Sundar Ray S/O Ram Chandra Ray R/O Village- Jalalpur Mashari
Tola, P.S- Pupri, Distt.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Gulnar Begum, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-03-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 18 liters of liquor from Leela Devi
and 11.625 liters of liquor from possession of Bechan Rai.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from possession of accused named in the FIR with
whom petitioner has no concern or relation and his named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10107 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
transpired based on confessional statement of Bechan in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also
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 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 before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Pupri P.S.
Case No. 402 of 2025 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 more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10107 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…