Patna High Court
Laxman MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to statutory conditions and verification of his antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Laxman Mandal, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, where liquor was allegedly recovered from his house and a co‑resident's house. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, that the liquor was in joint family property and thus not his conscious possession, and that the 2018 amendment had abolished the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender. He further contended that the only evidence against him was a confession by his wife made while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments (Security) Act, with a further verification of his criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances.
- Whether the confession of the petitioner’s wife made in police custody is admissible as evidence.
- Whether the concept of deemed possession under the Excise Act applies post‑2018 amendment.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments (Security) Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confession in custody
- joint family property
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15920 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2026 Thana- GHANSHYAMPUR District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Laxman Mandal S/O Gokul Mandal Resident of Village- Punhad, Police
Station- Ghanshyampur, District- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Mili Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akbar Ali, 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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases out of which one case is
under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 25.380
litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner and 14.940 litres
of liquor from the house of Neelu Devi.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15920 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
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. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the
confessional statement of his wife Purnima Devi in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of
law. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a
case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically
either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, secret
information or confessional statement without holding a proper
investigation of the case. It is submitted that no wife would
implicate her own husband until coerced.
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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15920 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
Court in connection with Ghanshyampur P.S. Case No. 24 of
2026, 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 more than two cases,
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 has antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…