Patna High Court
Bhola Kumar @ Rupesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners subject to bond, sureties, and verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Bhola Kumar and Chhotu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging possession of 4,400 litres of liquor recovered from Rahul Kumar, with charges under several IPC sections and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. They contended that they were not arrested on the spot, had no conscious possession, and were implicated solely on Rahul Kumar's custodial confession, which they argued lacks evidentiary value, and asserted no relationship with him. They further argued 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 conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedents, stipulating that if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under the circumstances alleged.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a co-accused in police custody is admissible for implicating the petitioners.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act has eliminated the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 34, 341, 342, 353, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- excise law
- criminal antecedent
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16153 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-359 Year-2020 Thana- BYPASS District- Patna
======================================================
1. Bhola Kumar @ Rupesh Kumar son of Ranjeet Saw @ Ranjit Sah Resident
of Village - Karmali Chak Begampur, PS - Bypass, PO - Patna City, Patna
2. Chhotu Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Son of Ranjeet Saw @ Ranjit Sah Resident
of Village - Karmali Chak Begampur, PS - Bypass, PO - Patna City, Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Basheer Faizi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 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 147, 149,
341, 342, 353, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well
as Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 4.400 litres of liquor from possession of Rahul
Kumar.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16153 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession. It is further
submitted that petitioners came to be implicated based on the
confessional statement of Rahul Kumar in police custody which
does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law. It is next
submitted that petitioners have no concern or relation with
Rahul Kumar. It is also 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.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Bypass P.S. Case No. 359 of 2020, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16153 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners
and if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of more than
one case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed
their 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 have antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.