Patna High Court
Md. Sarafaraj @ Sarfaraj Ahmad @ Mo SarpharajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Sarafaraj, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 18 litres of liquor recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. He argued that he was not apprehended on the spot, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail, relying on a confessional statement made by an accused in police custody. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order is subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, and the bail may be confirmed or revoked based on that verification.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminates the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender in this case.
- Whether a confessional statement of an accused in police custody can be the basis for denying anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14553 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2025 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Md. Sarafaraj @ Sarfaraj Ahmad @ Mo Sarpharaj S/o Sekh Kalam R/o
Village - New Vasti, Miyanpur, Ward 03, P.S - Bairiya, District - West
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mayank Mohan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-03-2026 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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 18 liters of liquor from house of the
petitioner.
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 the house in
question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14553 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
2/3
with certainty that it was petitioner 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 based on
confessional statement of apprehended accused in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
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.
5,000/- (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 Bairiya
P.S. Case No. 283 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 more
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14553 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
3/3
than 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 has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…