Patna High Court
Ganesh MarandiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Ganesh Marandi was apprehended in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 50 litres of liquor recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. The petitioner argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, that the concept of deemed possession was removed by the 2018 amendment, and that he had only two prior excise cases. The State opposed anticipatory bail. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent within six weeks. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged possession of liquor and prior criminal antecedent
- Whether the amendment removing deemed possession affects the bail decision
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 482
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17393 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2025 Thana- KADWA District- Katihar
======================================================
Ganesh Marandi S/o Haldhar Marandi R/o Sosa, Santhali Tola, PS- Kadwa,
Distt- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP
======================================================
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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 50 liters of liquor from house of the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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.17393 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and 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 it does not
appear probable that an outsider would know who had
concealed the liquor inside the house.
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 Kadwa
P.S. Case No. 187 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17393 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
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 only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.