Patna High Court
Ohila Devi @ Ahilya Devi @ Ohila KuwarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application provisionally, subject to verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents.
Summary
Four petitioners, residents of a joint family house in Garkha, Saran, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 180 litres of liquor. They argued that the liquor was not in their conscious possession, that the house is a joint family property, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act eliminated the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the anticipatory bail application. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that each petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with sureties, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if verification shows more antecedent cases than disclosed, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
- Whether the post‑2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolishes the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender for the purpose of granting bail.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482 CrPC
- joint family property
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14885 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-846 Year-2025 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran
======================================================
1. Ohila Devi @ Ahilya Devi @ Ohila Kuwar Wife of Late Ashok Choudhari
Resident of Village- Mithepur, Baniyawa Tola, P.S.- Garkha, District- Saran
2. Lakshman Choudhary Son of Henda Choudhary Resident of Village-
Mithepur, Baniyawa Tola, P.S.- Garkha, District- Saran
3. Krishna Choudhary Son of Henda Choudhary Resident of Village- Mithepur,
Baniyawa Tola, P.S.- Garkha, District- Saran
4. Rakesh Choudhary @ Rakesh Chaudhari Son of Jainarayan Chaudhari
Resident of Village- Mithepur, Baniyawa Tola, P.S.- Garkha, District- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raushan Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners no.1, 2 and 3 have antecedent of one case under the
Excise Act and petitioner no.4 has antecedents of two cases
under the Excise Act and petitioner no.1 is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 180 litres of liquor from house of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14885 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
2/3
four different accused-petitioners. It is next submitted that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and the house in
question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it were petitioners who had kept the liquor in
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within their
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 the petitioners came to be
implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom they are on
inimical terms. It is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware
of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence then why
he did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant
FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14885 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
3/3
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1 st
Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Saran at Chapra in connection
with Garkha P.S. Case No.846 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
if it is found that petitioners no.1, 2 and 3 have antecedent of
more than one case and petitioner no.4 has antecedent of more
than two cases, then it would be presumed that petitioners for
the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if
on verification, it is found that petitioners no.1, 2 and 3 have
antecedent of only one case and petitioner no.4 has antecedent
of only two cases, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.