Patna High Court
Ramesh Rai @ Ramesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramesh Rai, 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 two vehicles. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the vehicles, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by another person in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, conditioning it on the petitioner furnishing bail bonds and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; if exactly two are found, the bail would be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody can form the basis for arrest in the absence of seized possession.
- Whether the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender applies after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 30
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16422 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2026 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna
======================================================
Ramesh Rai @ Ramesh Kumar Son of Harishchandra Rai @ Harish Rai
Resident Of Village -Nuruddinganj, Ps -Malsalami, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
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
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 100 litres of liquor from an auto and
50 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next submitted that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
any of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Rama kumar in police custody which
does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16422 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
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 also submitted that once an accused is
implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts
implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local
person, confessional statement or secret information without
holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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 court in
connection with Malsalami P.S. Case No.39/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
two cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16422 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…