Patna High Court

Vinay KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 12 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court ordered provisional anticipatory bail, to be confirmed after verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Vinay Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 36 litres of liquor near the Falgu river. He argued that the liquor was not in his possession, the alleged recovery occurred on public land, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of a co-accused taken in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. He also highlighted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and two sureties, directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent before confirming the bail.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged contravention is based on a confessional statement of a co-accused.
Whether the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender affects the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
confessional statement
deemed possession
presumed offender
clean antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13940 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2025 Thana- CHAKAND District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Vinay Kumar S/O Nirmal Chaudhary R/O village- Peer Bigha, PS- Chakand,
                 Distt- Gayaji

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 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 Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 36 liters of liquor from a place near bank of Falgu

                   river.

                                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 a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and is accessible to villagers at large and came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13940 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                            2/3




          based on confessional statement of Sonu in police custody

          which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next 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.

          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 Chakand

          P.S. Case No. 344 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 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13940 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a

                      person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                      anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                              (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…