Patna High Court

Raja singh @ Kumar GautamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 27 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Raja Singh, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that 14.92 litres of liquor were recovered from a vehicle owned by Sheikh Nasiruddin, not from the petitioner. He argued he had no conscious possession, no ownership of the vehicle, and that the confession of Sheikh Nasiruddin was inadmissible. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks; if any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022
Whether the confession of the co-accused can be the basis for arrest of the petitioner
Effect of the amendment removing the concept 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
Section 438 CrPC
excise law
possession
clean antecedent
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16176 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-286 Year-2025 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Raja singh @ Kumar Gautam Son of Vijay Singh R/o Village - Langarpur,
                 P.S. - Barh, Dist. - Patna.
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Ramesh Chandra, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   27-04-2026                  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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 14.920 litres of liquor from possession of Sheikh

                   Nasiruddin in an auto.

                                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 and came to

                   be implicated based on the confessional statement of

                   apprehended accused, namely, Sheikh Nasiruddin in police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16176 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
                                            2/3




          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 appearing on behalf of 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 Athmalgola P.S.

          Case No. 286 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 petitioner

          and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,

          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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16176 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…