Patna High Court
Mukesh Yadav @ Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Mukesh Yadav and Nitu Devi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 92.5 litres of liquor from their joint family house. They argued that the liquor was not in their conscious possession, the house is jointly owned, and the FIR does not disclose the informant, challenging the prosecution's reliance on presumed possession after the 2018 amendment that abolished the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditioned the confirmation of bail on verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents, reserving the right to revoke bail if antecedents exceed the stated limits.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of a disclosed informant and the removal of the deemed possession concept affect the validity of the charges.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- deemed possession
- criminal antecedent
- joint family property
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10780 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1070 Year-2025 Thana- PIRBAHOR District- Patna
======================================================
1. Mukesh Yadav @ Mukesh Kumar S/O Late Sanjv Kumar @ Sanjit Yadav @
Khira Yadav R/O- Musallahpur Naya Gaon Mahendru Shitla Mandir, P.S.-
Pirbahore, Distt- Patna
2. Nitu Devi W/O Late Sanjiv Kumar @ Sanjit Yadav @ Khira Yadav R/O -
Imali Naya Gaon , P.S.- Pirbahore, Distt- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Jiban Pd Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 has antecedent of two cases and petitioner no.2
has antecedent of one case and is a woman and allegation is of
recovery of 92.5 litres of liquor from house of the petitioners. It
is next submitted that petitioners were not arrested from the spot
as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession
and the house in question is a joint family property as such it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10780 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/3
cannot be alleged with certainty that it were petitioners, who
had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house
was within their knowledge and after amendment in the Excise
Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with and they came to
be implicated at the instance of local person but then it is
submitted that the name of the person who disclosed the name
of the petitioners is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that
once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the
police starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar,
local person, confessional statement or secret information
without holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. 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 from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10780 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
3/3
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Pirbahore P.S. Case No.1070/2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners
and in the event if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent
of more than two cases and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of
more than one case, in that event, it would be presumed that
petitioners had concealed their antecedent before this court, as
such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed with respect to those petitioners whose criminal
antecedent does not tally but if after verification the criminal
antecedent as recorded hereinabove tallies with the petitioners in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.