Patna High Court
Laxman Dhari @ Laxman Kumar DhariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted where there is no concrete evidence of possession and the allegation rests solely on secret information, subject to verification of the applicant’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
Laxman Dhari applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 15 litres of liquor from his joint family house. The petitioner argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and the property is jointly owned, making it uncertain that he kept the liquor. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner had a prior case under the Excise Act. The court noted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concept of deemed possession and that reliance on secret information alone was insufficient for denial of bail. Consequently, the court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, with the possibility of revocation if more than one prior case is found. The order was made subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when alleged possession of liquor is not established and the property is jointly owned?
- Whether the removal of the concept of deemed possession under the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act affects the grant of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 438
- joint family property
- possession
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16250 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-250 Year-2025 Thana- SARMERA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Laxman Dhari @ Laxman Kumar Dhari Son of Arjun Dhari Village- Bari
Misiyan Ps -Sarmera District- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 15 litres of liquor from the
house of the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16250 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with and he came to be implicated based on secret
information, which is the easiest way to implicate someone
without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Sarmera P. S. Case No.250 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16250 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…