Patna High Court
Munna Chaudhary @ Munna KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond and verification of antecedent, holding that the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and clean record justify bail.
Summary
Munna Chaudhary applied for anticipatory bail after the police registered a case (PS‑298/2025) alleging he possessed 15 litres of liquor in violation of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. He argued that the liquor was recovered from a joint‑family house, not from his conscious possession, and that the concept of deemed possession had been abolished by the 2018 amendment. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering his clean antecedent and the factual circumstances, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.500 bond with two sureties and directed verification of his criminal record. If any antecedent is found, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, it will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case of alleged possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022?
- Whether the recovery of liquor from a joint‑family house, without proof of conscious possession, negates the charge of possession?
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing the concept of deemed possession affects the bail application.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- excise law
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 438
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14190 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2025 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
Munna Chaudhary @ Munna Kumar S/o Ramashish Chaudhary Resident of
village - Jhitkahiya, P.S.- Rajepur, Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 15 litres of liquor from a bag and the house of the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who
had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14190 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
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. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of
the 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, when petitioner
admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
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, let 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 Rajepur P.S. Case No. 298 of 2025, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14190 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…