Patna High Court
Lalbabu Rai @ Lalbabu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Lalbabu Rai, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of liquor recovered from his house and that of another person. He argued that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, the house is a joint family property, and the concept of deemed possession was abolished after the 2018 amendment, rendering the accusation weak. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offence is non-bailable. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. The order is subject to Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and confirmation of the bail will depend on the antecedent verification.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the abolition of the deemed possession concept after the 2018 amendment affects the bail application.
- Whether the absence of liquor in the petitioner’s conscious possession and the joint family nature of the property preclude arrest.
- Whether the police investigation was sufficient to sustain the charge.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- police investigation
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12194 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2025 Thana- Bhopatpur District- East Champaran
======================================================
Lalbabu Rai @ Lalbabu Yadav S/O Jagnnath Rai @ Jagarnath Yadav Resident
of Village- Jamuniya, Ward no. 12, P.S.- Bhopatpur, District- East
Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and 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 20 litres of liquor from house of
Uday Kumar and 30 litres of liquor from the house of the
petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested
from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious
possession and the house in question is a joint family property
as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12194 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the
house was within his 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 he came to
be implicated at the instance of local person but then the name
of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner 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 petitioner.
5. 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 from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5000/- (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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12194 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
Bhopatpur P.S. Case No.102/2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…