Patna High Court
Sashikant Yadav @ Shasheekant Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the stipulated bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sashikant Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after apprehending arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly possessing 75 litres of liquor recovered from a motorcycle. He contended that he was not the owner of the vehicle, that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and that the case was based on a confessional statement made by Vishnu Kumar in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. He further submitted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, after which the bail would be confirmed or cancelled accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act where the accused claims lack of conscious possession and ownership of the seized vehicle.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody is admissible as evidence for the charge.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act on the doctrines of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- deemed possession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15018 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2025 Thana- DARIHAT District- Rohtas
======================================================
Sashikant Yadav @ Shasheekant Kumar Singh S/o- Avadhesh Yadav @
Avadhesh Singh Resident of Village- Madhurampur PS- Akorhigola District-
Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 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 Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 75 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle but then
inadvertently, at para 5, it has been pleaded that petitioner is the
owner of the motorcycle, though, at para 7, it is clearly recorded
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15018 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the
confessional statement of Vishnu Kumar in police custody
which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law. 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, 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 Darihat P.S. Case No. 84 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
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15018 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
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…