Patna High Court
Suresh DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Suresh Das, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act for alleged recovery of 62 litres of liquor from a public pit. He argued he had no prior criminal record, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of another person taken in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The court noted the amendment of the Excise Act in 2018 had removed the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, and therefore granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and two sureties, with a condition that the trial court verify his antecedents before confirming the bail. If any prior case is found, the bail would be presumed concealed and not confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act
- Whether the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender applies post‑2018 amendment
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody can form the basis for arrest
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14050 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2026 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna
======================================================
Suresh Das Son of Tuntun Das Resident Of Village- Bundel Toli, Ps-
Malsalami, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 62 litres of liquor from a pit near Bundeltoli ghat. It
is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested 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 public at large and
he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Mukesh in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14050 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
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.
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 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 Malsalami P.S. Case No.06/2026, 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 even 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 is a person with clean
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14050 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…