Patna High Court
Dheeraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, and conditioned its confirmation on a clean criminal record.
Summary
The petitioner, Dheeraj Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Sections 30(a), 56(b) and 62 of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 28.5 litres of liquor from a house he does not own. He argued that he was not caught in possession, that the alleged recovery was not from his conscious possession, and that the case relied on a confessional statement made by another person, Prince, while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner also highlighted that the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 and two sureties, and ordered that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming the bail; if any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused is not found in possession of the alleged contraband.
- Whether a confessional statement made by another person in police custody can form the basis for anticipatory bail denial.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act removing the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender on bail considerations.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- confessional statement
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13700 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
Dheeraj Kumar S/O Maheshwar yadav R/O Village - Nirpur, P.S- Sheikhpura
District- Sheikhpura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bipin Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 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 Sections 30(a),
56(b) and 62 of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 28.5 litres of liquor from a house near RD college.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the house, but then came to be implicated based on confessional
statement of Prince in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value. It is next submitted that after amendment in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13700 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
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 within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Excise P.S. Case No. 30 of 2026, 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 even
one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13700 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.