Patna High Court
Ramesh @ Ramesh Agrawal @ Ramesh HanumanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedent, with confirmation if the petitioner is found to have a clean record.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramesh Agrawal, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 1,123.2 litres of liquor from a pick‑up. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, was not the vehicle owner, and was not named in the FIR; his alleged involvement stemmed solely from a confessional statement of another accused, which he contended lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, noting the amendment of the Excise Act that abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. If the petitioner is found to have a clean record, the bail will be confirmed; otherwise, it may be withdrawn. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused is not in possession of the alleged contraband and is implicated solely by another's confessional statement.
- Whether the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, removed by the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, affect the bail application.
- What conditions must be satisfied for confirmation or revocation of provisional anticipatory bail based on verification of criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Cr.P.C. 438
- B.N.S.S. 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17311 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2024 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Ramesh @ Ramesh Agrawal @ Ramesh Hanuman S/o Hanuman Resident of
Mohalla - Marwadi Mohalla, Nagar Panchayat Nichlaul, Ward No. 13, P.S -
Piprasi, Nichlaul, District - Maharajganj Pin - 273304 Uttar Pradesh
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gautam Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 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 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 1123.2 litres of liquor from a pick-up.
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 is not
named in the FIR and came to be implicated based on the
confessional statement of Naresh Prasad Yadav in police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17311 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
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 for 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 Dhanaha P.S. Case No. 51 of 2024, 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. 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 shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17311 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
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
Checking your session…