Patna High Court
GUDDU KUMAR @ GUDDU MANJHIversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with bail conditions.
Summary
Guddu Kumar petitioned for anticipatory bail after a FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 20 litres of liquor from his joint family house. The petitioner argued that he was not arrested on the spot, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and the concept of deemed possession had been abolished by the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act. He also questioned the credibility of the chowkidar’s complaint, noting their inimical relationship and the lack of prior police notification. The State opposed the bail. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent; if more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged liquor was not in the petitioner’s conscious possession.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminates the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16596 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-413 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya
======================================================
GUDDU KUMAR @ GUDDU MANJHI S/O SURESH MANJHI R/O
Village- Bhagalpur Channa, P.S.- Chandauti, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Upendra Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 20 litres of liquor from the house of
the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and the house in
question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16596 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge
of the petitioner. 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 and
he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with
whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if
Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the petitioner in
the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to
institution of the instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution.
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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
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
Chandauti P.S. Case No. 413 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16596 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
than two cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if 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)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…