Patna High Court
Subhash @ Subhash Kumar Paswan @ Subhash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioners’ antecedent, and stipulated that confirmation depends on a clean criminal record.
Summary
The petitioners, Subhash Kumar Paswan and Anil Kumar Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 274, 275 and 3(3) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. They contended that the liquor seized (92.88 litres) was not in their conscious possession, they were not owners of the motorcycles from which it was recovered, and the case against them relied solely on a confessional statement made by another accused in police custody, which they argued lacks evidentiary value. The petitioners further submitted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, insisting on the seriousness of the offences. The Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. Act, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, directing the trial court to verify the petitioners’ antecedent before confirming the bail; if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed. The order thus conditionally protects the petitioners pending verification of their clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offences
- Whether the confessional statement of another accused can form the basis for arrest and bail denial
- Whether the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender apply after the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 274, 275, 3(3), 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16040 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-239 Year-2025 Thana- ARER District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Subhash @ Subhash Kumar Paswan @ Subhash Kumar Son of Jagjeevan
Paswan R/o - Jhitkohia, P.S - Basopatti, District - Madhubani, Bihar.
2. Anil Kumar @ Anil Kumar Yadav Son of Bechan Yadav R/o Village
-Mahthaur, P.S - Basopatti, District - Madhubani, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275
and 3(3) of the BNS, 2023 as well as Section 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 92.88 litres of liquor from two motorcycles.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession. It is further
submitted that petitioners are not the owner of the seized vehicle
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16040 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
and came to be implicated based on the confessional statement
of apprehended accused 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 petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, let the
petitioners, above-named, in the event of their 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) each 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
Arer P.S. Case No. 239 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. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners
and if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one
case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16040 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
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
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…