Patna High Court
Rakesh Kumar Singh @ Rakesh SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, with confirmation contingent on the number of prior cases.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar Singh, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a), 41(1) and 41(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 320 litres of spirit from a field belonging to another person. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, had no possession, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement made in police custody, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. He also contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.55,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent; if more than eleven prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case involving alleged excise offences.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody is admissible for the purpose of arrest.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act eliminates 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)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16631 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Rakesh Kumar Singh @ Rakesh Singh S/O Krishna Singh @ Krishna Kumar
Singh R/O Village- Ishapur, P.S- Madanpur, Distt.- Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-04-2026 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 Sections 30(a),
41(1) and 41(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of eleven cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 320 litres of spirit from a field
behind the house of Manoj Kumar Singh.
4. 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 alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and he has no concern or relation with Manoj Kumar Singh. It is
further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16631 of 2026(3) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
the confessional statement of Nitish Kumar Singh @ Tuntun in
police 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. It is also
submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the
instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement
or secret information without holding a proper investigation of
the case. It is further submitted that petitioner in similar manner
earlier also came to be implicated in cases relating to excise.
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.55,000/-
(Rupees Fifty-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
Aurangabad Excise P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16631 of 2026(3) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
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 more than
eleven cases, 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
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only eleven cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…